Me 184 

;'1 .F8 fl95 
\ { Copy 1 



THE 






INFLUENCE OF FRENCH IMMIGRATION 




ON THE 




*OLiTicAL History OF THE United States, 





[A Thesis for the Doctor's Degree, University oi Minnesota" 



By Elizabeth H, Avery, 




THE 



Influence of French Immigration 



ON THE 



Political History of the United States. 







[A Thesis for the Doctor's Degree, University of Minnesota.] 



By Elizabeth H. Avery. 






\3_. 



AW 



CONTENTS. 

Page. 

Introduction 9 

The Hug'uenots: 

1. Huguenot Settlements 11 

2. The Revolutionary Period 18 

3. The Treaty of Peace 23 

4. State Constitutions 27 

5. The National Constitution 29 

6. The Early Days of the Constitution 33 

The Pi-ench Catholics: 

1. The Old Northwest 44 

2. The Louisiana Purchase 55 

Comparison and Conclusion. 60 

Appendix C>6 

Bibliography "0 



PREFATORY NOTE. 

/^^HE investigation of which the results are herewith pre- 
^' sented was begun witli the thought of preparing a paper 
for the Seminary of American History in the University 
of Minnesota. A very brief survey sufficed to show that here 
was a field, practically unworked, intensly fascinating, and of 
no small importance. The study was therefore continued and 
the paper was expanded to the present limits. 

At no stage of the research, have I consciously labored to 
establish a pre-conceived theory. Indeed, in the main, the re- 
sults reached are far other than I should have anticipated. 
The conclusions of a first effort in a new field are necessarily 
somewhat tentative, and I shall be quite satisfied if the results 
of this study shall lead others, better equipped, to continue the 
investigation, whether the final results agree with those 
here reached or not. 



INTRODUCTION. 

The formerly accepted theory that American institutions are 
almost exclusively of Anglo-Saxon origin, has of late been vig- 
orously attacked. In particular, large claims to a share in the 
honor of building the American nation have been asserted on 
behalf of the Dutch. ^ Whataver the final judgment of sober 
historical criticism on such claims may be, it is evident that 
much is to be g-ained by careful study of the influence of other 
than English-speaking peoples on the origin and development 
of our institutions. Such a study in regard to the early French 
settlers will be attempted in this paper. 

At the outset we are confronted by the fact that, in the main, 
these settlers fall into two groups: the French Protestants, 
mostly refuges from persecution at home, who came to the At-, 
lantic colonies; and the French Catholics, who, coming for 
purposes of traffic or sent by a paternal government, founded 
settlements in the "old Northwest" and the Mississippi valley. 
For clearness of treatment, it seems best to study separately 
the effect of these two streams of immigration, and then to 
compare their influence. 

^Especially in Douglas Canipbell's work, "The Puritan in England,. 
Holland, and America." W. E. Griffl-;, also, asserts that W3 'borrowed 
from the Netherhmds, "in germ or directly," eighteen features of our 
government. Among them are the separation of church and state, free- 
dom of the press, freedom of religion, the supreme court, the common 
school system, etc. See National Magazine, vol. XV., p. 603. 



I. HUGUENOTS. 



I. HUGUENOT SETTLEMENTS. 



♦|r^UGUENOT immigration to this country began at a very 
ll»/ early period. It would, however, be quite beside my 
present purpose to relate the story of the ill-fated 
colonies sent out by Coligny, or even to give in detail the ac- 
counts of more successful undertakings in later years. I shall 
attempt only a brief summary, in the order of colonies rather 
than in chronological order, of the settlements made by them 
in the United States. 

It appears that while the Pilgrims tarried iaLeyden, friend- 
ly relations sprang up between them and some of the French 
refugees who were also settled there, for the Mayflower 
brought among its passengers certain Huguenots, Philip De- 
lanoy and Wm. Molines with his wife, son, and daughter,^ the 
latter of whom has been immortalized by one of her own de- 
scendants as the ''Puritan maiden Priscilla" Mullins. 

In 1662, the General Court of Massachusetts granted to 
John Touton, a physician of Rochelle, and other French Pro- 
testants expelled on account of their faith, permission to settle 
in the colony. ^ Within the next quarter of a century these 
were followed by quite a large number of their countrymen. 
Soon after the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes, the proprie- 
tors of a tract of land in the Nipmuck country inviced some 
thirty of them thither and made them a grant of eleven or 
twelve thousand acres. The village of Oxford which they 
founded flourished for a time but was abandoned in 1704 on ac- 



'.T. C. Hotten, Original Lists of Emigrants to America, Introduction, 
p. XXV., and C. W. Baird, Huguenot Emigration to America, I., 154 
and 158. All the Molines family except the daughter died during the 
first winter. 

^Mass. Col. Records, vol. IV., part II., p. 67. See also, Memorial Hist, 
of Boston. II., 250, where it is stated that Touton came over in 1675 and 
that the first considerable company came in 1686. Cites MS. copy 
of Council Records in the office of Sec. of State, p. 52. 



12 

count of Indian massacres, the inhabitants going to Boston 
and other places. ^ 

Some forty or fifty families made a settlement, which they 
called Frenchtown, in East Greenwich. Rhode Island, in the 
autumn of 1686. Owing to disputes about land titles, these 
settlers were afterwards scattered over the Narragansett 
country. After the Revolution many of them moved to Ver- 
mont, New York, Pennsylvania and thence farther west.''' 

In the latter part of the seventeenth and the beginning of 
the eighteenth century, Connecticut received a small accession 
of Huguenots who located mostly in Milford and Hartford. ^ 

Huguenot settlements were made in New York earlier than 
elsewhere. Indeed there is evidence that the first white child 
born in that region, in 1614 or 1615, was of Huguenot parent- 
age.^ In 1623, a Dutch ship brought over nearly thirty Wal- 
loon families, some of whom settled on Manhattan Island, 
others near the present site of Philadelphia, and still others at 
Fort Orange — now Albany. There was considerable desultory 
migration before the Revocation and settlements were formed 
on both Staten Island and Long Island.'' 

In 1677, several families from the Palatinate located west of 
the Hudson and in grateful commemoration of their previous 
place of refuge called their village New Paltz." 

New Rochelle, Westchester Co. , was settled in 1689, the land 

'Daniels. Hist, of Oxford, p. 19; Mass. Hist. Coll. vol. XXII., p. 29; C. 
W. Baird gives lists of French settlers in Mass. from a variety of origi- 
nal sources. 

*Baird, II., 291, ff.: Potter, History of P'rench Settlements and Settlers 
in Rhode Island, pp. 17, 18. 88, and 89. This little book contains copies 
of original documents and is very valuable for the study of this settle- 
ment. 

'Huguenot Emigration to America, II., 330. ff. The authorities seem 
to be genealogical records. 

^Memorial Hist, of N. Y., I., 144. 145: Coll. of Huguenot Soc. of N. Y., 
I.. Introd.,p. X. and footnote. Both refer to the Journal of Labadist 
voyagers. Bankers and Sluyter, whose date was about 1679. 

'Doc. "Hist, of N. Y., III., 35; Huguenot Emigration to America, 
I., 170; Coll. of Huguenot Soc, I., Introd. pp. XIV. and XY. 

«Coll. of Ulster Hist. Soc. vol. I. part I. p. 34. There had been Wal- 
loon se'ttlers in that region previously. See Huguenot Coll. I., introd. 
XIV. The Walloons were people of French extraction living in the re- 
gion now comprised in the department dii Xord and the S. W. provinces 
of Belgium. The Protestants among them were practically Huguenots. 
See Huguenot Emigration to America, I., 149-151 and Huguenot Coll., I. 
Introd X.. footnote. 



13 

having been purchased from Leisler. The settlers were from' 
the city which figures so largely in Huguenot history.^ 

Many refugees who went first to the West Indies came thence- 
to New York.- 

Individual families located here and there in New Jersey— a 
little group of them near Princeton— but the first and probably 
the only settlement looking to permanence was that on the 
Hackensack. This was begun in 1677 under the leadership of 
David Demarest. a native of Picardy, who on coming to Ameri- 
ca first joined a Huguenot colony on Staten Island and later 
was a prominent citizen of New Harlem. The colony pros- 
pered, tract after tract of land was added, and before the Revo- 
lution it sent emigrants to Western New York, to Adams Co., 
Pennsylvania, and to Harrod's Station, Kentucky. ^ "' ' ,' 

French' immigrants came also to Delaware, 16 Berks Co , 
Pennsylvania, possibly to Maryland, and in much larger num- 
bers to Virginia.^ Some came to the latter colony as early as 
1660, perhaps earlier. Between 1690 and 1700, the arrivals 
amounted in all to "700 or 800 men, women, and children, who 
had fled from France on account of their religion." Their 
principal settlement was at Manakintown, about twenty miles 
above the falls of the James River. From this place many of 
them moved to more desirable lands on the Trent River in 
North Carolina.'^ 

Charles II. sent a colony of French Protestants at his own' 
expense to South Carolina in 1679. During the reign of James 

'Doc. Hist, of N. Y.. III., 955. tf. C W. Baird has an interesting note 
in Mag. of Am. Hist.. II., -193. ft'., in wliicli he argues that Leisler was a 
Huguenot and hence especially interested in locating these families. 
Cf. on this point Huguenot Coll., I. Introd., XXVI., footnote and the 
references there given. 

'N. Y. Col. Doc, IX.. 309. 

'These and other interesting particulars may be found in '"The Hu- 
guenots on the Hackensack," an address delivered before the Huguenot 
Soc. by Rev. Dr. Demarest, a descendant of the founder. It is published 
in A^ol. I. of the proceedings of the Soc. and also separately in pamphlet 
form. 

*Huguenot Coll. I., XIY., Huguenot Emigration to America, I., 133, 
flf.. Rupp, Thirty Tliousand Names of Emigrants to Penn., pp. XYI. and 
XVIII.. and Talcott Gen. Notes of N. Y. and New Eng., 80. 

^The introduction to vol. V. of the Va. Hist. Coll. states that the 
names of record in the State Land Registry indicate desultory Walloon 
immigration early in the 17th centurv. See also Mead, Old Churches 
and Families of Va., I., 463, ft".; Rupp, 362; C. L. Hunter, Sketches of 
Western N. Car., 6; and Beverly, JHistoire De la Virginie, 188. ff. and380,fl. 



14 

II., collections were made for them in England, Parliament at 
one time granting them aid. Their early settlements were 
chiefly near the Santee and Cooper rivers. In 1730 the Purys- 
burg settlement was made. In 1761 the Assembly of the colo- 
ny passed an act for encouraging foreign Protestants to settle 
there, which had the effect to bring over six hundred persons 
in about three years. The Abbeville District seems to have 
been settled by these later comers.^ 

Besides these more important settlements to which I have 
called attention, there were separate families or small groups 
of families who came over at various times. The Huguenot 
Society of America recognizes fourteen "original settlements." 
New York City, Staten Island, Liong Island, New Rochelle, 
New Paltz, Boston, New Oxford, Narragansetts, Maine, Dela- 
ware, Pennsylvania, Virginia, South Carolina, and Florida. As 
I have shown, nearly all the thirteen colonies received, at some 
time before the Revolution, at least a few Huguenot settlers. 

It is probably impossible to ascertain with any approach to 
accuracy how large a part of the population they formed. Pal- 
frey says that one hundred and fifty families came to New Eng- 
land after the Revocation, and Baird considers this estimate 
too low. 2 Moreover there had been considerable immigration 
to that colony at an earlier date, as we have seen. One writer 
holds that the number who came before the Revocation was 
much greater than has been supposed, and estimates chat in 
1670 the Huguenots were one-fourth the population of New 
York. Another states that 17,000 has been mentioned as a 
probable number in South Carolina.^ And the historian of 
those who settled on the Hackensack says: "Historians * * 
know nothing of a Huguenot element as a factor of any impor- 
tance" in New Jersey. "But suppose that you were today to 
remove * * all who bear the names of the original Hugue- 
not settlers on the Hackensack. and of those who soon after 
located in the neighborhood * * you would vacate a very 

'Transicbion-i of the Hii^usnot Sac. of S. Car., I.. 10. 12, 15, II., 55, 
III., 65 and 66; Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., XXII, 35: S Car. Hist. Soc. Coll. 
I., 100, flf. (The French Protectants of the Abbeville District); Holmes, 
Annals, I., 394, 453, 460, 472, and 489; and Lee, Huguenots in France and 
America, II., 72 and 73. 

. 'Palfrey, Hist, of New Eng., I., preface p. VIII.; C. W. Baird, II., 202. 

'See Mag. Am. Hist. IX., 295, (an article by Rev. A. V. Wittmeyer, 
rector of the French church Saint Esprit); and Trans. Huguenot Soc. S. 
Car., III. 37. 



15 

large proportion of the houses and farms in an extensive dis- 
trict. And if, in addition, you were to remove all who. though 
bearing Dutch names, have quite as much French as Dutch 
blood in their veins, you would create a wilderness almost 
without inhabitants." * * * * 

Whatever may be thought of such estimates, the indications 
are that they were a larger element of the colonial population 
than we are accustomed to think. At all events they were 
sufficiently numerous to make it a matter of interest and im- 
portance to determine how far and in what ways they in- 
fluenced national development. 

A people so industrious, thrifty, and religious would be ex- 
pected to have a beneficial influence upon the economic and 
moral life of the colonies, and the course of contemporary 
evidence as well as the results of later investigations point in 
that direction. It is quite likely, as suggested by some wri- 
ters, that their more genial type of piety may have softened 
somewhat the sternness of their Puritan neighbors in New 
England. And it is at least possible that the milder character 
of the Pilgrims was in part due to their friendly intercourse 
with the Huguenots in Leyden. These "men who had the vir- 
tues of the English Puritans without their bigotry," "so far as 
we can learn, brought only good gifts to the American colo- 
nies," and "it seems very probable that much of American 
quickness and vivacity is due to the early and wide-spread dif- 
fusion of Huguenot blood. "^ 

Some of them made, if not more substantial, at least more 
tangible gifts to the homes of their adoption, from the city 
clock given in 1716 by Stephen Delancey to Trinity church 
New York, to Gabriel Manigault's loan of |220,000 at the out- 
set of the Re volution. 2 The most widely known of these gifts 
is, of course, the "Cradle of Liberty," donated by Peter 
Faneuil to the city of Boston. ^ 

'The quotations are from Bancroft, Hist, of the U. S., I., 433, and 
from a review of Baird's work in Atlantic Monthly, LV., 843, ff. Elo- 
quent tributes to their virtues may be found in the Bi-Centenary Com- 
memoration. See especially Pres. Jay's address, p. 7, ff., and Prof. H. M. 
Baird's, p. 14, ff. Pp. 37 and ff. give Prof. Baird's estimate of their influ- 
ence on American life. 

'Holgate, Am. Genealogy, 115: Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., XXII.. 36. 

'A copy of the warrant for the town meeting to consider his offer is In 
New Eng Hist, and Gen. Reg. XXX., 368. See also Mem. Hist, of Bos- 
ton, I., 263, ff. 



16 

That as thrifty inhabitants they were gladly welcomed is in- 
dicated by the pecuniary aid granted to them in South Caro- 
lina, the exemption from taxes for a j^eriod of seven years in 
Virginia,^ and by the general tenor of contemporary reference 
to them. But' they were not, in most of the colonies, at once 
admitted to full pbliticnl rights, and in some cases there was 
evident jealousy of them as a people of alien nationality. In 
Rhode Island at tlie outbreak of King William's war, such ap- 
prehensions of their taking part with the French were felt that 
they wefe required to appear before a magistrate and take oath 
"to behave themselves."'-^ In South Carolina during Ludwell's 
administration, feeling ran so high that he thought it neces- 
sary for the' preservation of peace to exclude the Huguenots 
from all legislative cohcer'us, since "the haughty spirit (of the 
English) could not brook the thought of sitting in assemblies 
with the rivals of the English nation for power and dominion, 
and of receiving laws from Frenchmen, the favorers of a sys- 
tem of absolute government."^ It is said also that some went 
so far as to insist that marriages by French ministers were il- 
legal. But in time thesd disturbances quieted down, a naturali- 
zation law was passed, and intermarriages took place.'* 

Special acts of naturalization and "denization" were also 
passed in other colonies,^ and we find frequent mention of 
Huguenots in official positions.*" But with one possible excep- 
tion,^ I can' find nO evidence that they ever unitedly exerted 

iVa. Hist. Coll., Y., 60. ■ 

^Rhode Island Gol. Records. 111., -264. 

*Hewitt, Hist. Acc't of S. Car. and Geo. (originally published in Lon- 
don, 1779), in S. Car. Hist. Coll. vol. I., Hildreth. II., 210, says that in 
Sothel's tinie a law was passed for the enfranchisement of Huguenots 
but was one of those rejected in mass by the proprietors as lacking legal 
sanctions; and their increasing numbers caused the trouble in Ludwell's 
time. 

*Lee, Huguenots in France and America, II., 71, 75, and 77; Hildreth, 
II., 213; Banm)ft,.ll., 12. 

*The date in Md. was 1666; -in Va., 1671; Holmes. Annals, I., 311 and 
357. Denization was granted in N. Y. as earlv as 1698, possibly earlier. 
Cf. N. Y. Col. Doc, IV., loO. III., 126. Denizatirn, however, did not 
confer full political rights. (Huguenot Coll., I.. 108), and perhaps some 
confusion of these laws with those for naturalization may explain the 
discrepancies in the date as given by different writers. 

^Daniels, Hist, of Oxford, M^iss., pp. 12 and 757; Huguenots on the 
Hackensack, p. 6: Mass. Hist. Coll., XXII.. 30: anrl Mem. Hist, of N. Y., 
II., 19, ft. This last is a list of the Mayors of N. Y. down to 1700, several 
of whom were plainly of French extraction. 

'This exception was the Leisler difficulty in N. Y. Prominent Hug- 



17 

any political influence during the whole colonial period; nor do 
individuals of the race seem to have played so prominent a 
part as in later history. Yet further, it does not appear that 
in any way they made definite, original contributions to politi- 
cal thought in those times. Whatever effect they may have had 
upon colonial life, politically considered, is for the most part, 
untraceable. 

Nor need this surprise us. They had not the training hi that 
self-government which has so characterized the Teutonic peo- 
ples. Their anomalous "state within a state" had long smce 
ceased to have any vitality, and in its best days was rather 
imitative than original. They seem never to have acquired, as 
a people, a stock of political ideas, but probably experienced 
in their thinking upon such subjects — though possibly in a 
somewhat less degree than their fellow-countrymen — the para- 
lyzing influence of the French system of centralization. Com- 
ing then, as they did, solely to escape persecution, and settling 
among a people who felt entirely competent to solve all politi- 
cal problens, they were not likely to be important factors in 
political development till they had become somewhat assimi- 
lated to the rest of the population. By the beginning of the 
Revolutionary period this assimilation was quite complete. 
And I propose to show that during that period and later indi- 
viduals of French descent did much to shape the course of our 
national history. It must, however, be premised at the outset 
that the very completeness of their absoriDtion by the people 
among whom they settled renders it impossible to trace fully 
their influence. By the translation of their names into Eng- 
lish, by the gradual corruption of names through mispronunci- 
ation, and by intermarriages the lineage has been so obscured 
that many a man with a pretty large infusion of Huguenot 
blood may pass for a full blooded Yankee or Dutchman. ^ 



uenots were active in tlie affair and a majority of those in and around 
N. Y. petitioned for Leisler's pardon. They seem, too, to have acted 
unitedly, though without absohite unanimity. Nichohis Bayard was 
one of the opposition. See Huguenot Coll.. I., Introd.. XXVIII.: Mem. 
Hist, of N. Y., I., chap. XII. (Tlie period of the Leisler troubles ): and 
II., chaps. I. and II.; Doc. of Col. Hist, of N. Y., IV., 972 and 1064. 

"'The French element was so speedily absorbed by the surrounding 
Butch, that not a few of tlie numerous descendants V)f the Huguenot 
pioneers, fi'om whom the farms tliey occupy have comedown in unbroken 
descent tlirougli seven or eiglit generations, verily believe that they are 
of pure Holland stock, and tlie story of tlieir French origin is to them a 
new revelation.'" Huguenots on the Hackensack. pp. 1 and 2. 



II. THE REVOLUTIONARY PERIOD. 

COMING now to the times immediately preceding the Revolu- 
tion, it would be easy to compile from Force's Archives a 
list of men of undoubted French ancestry who belonged to 
committees, wrote letters, and in various other ways took part 
in the proceedings recorded in those facinating volumes.^ 
From other sources, too, many interesting: particulars may be 
gleaned. At least one Huguenot^ was a member of the Boston 
tea party, and another was one of those Americans in England 
who signed the petition to Parliament representing the possible 
fatal consequences of the Boston Port Bill.^ Nor can we for- 
get that, when it came to actual hostilities, the country was 
indebted to a Huguenot for the "midnight ride" which carried 
the news of the British march on Lexington;-^ nor that Francis 
Marion, the her6 of so many gallant exploits as well as the 
sturdy defender of the Tories against those who desired to 
proscribe them,'^ and John Laurens, whose brave conduct won 
him the honor of receiving the sword of Cornwallis, were 
Huguenots. 

But time does not permit us to dwell on such details, 
intensely fascinating as they are, in presence of the much more 

'Besides those better known, there are such names as Legare, 
Bouquet, Dubois, Hasbrouclc, Bounetheau, De Saussure, etc. 

*Goss' Life of Col. Paul Revere. I., 121. See App. to this paper for 
genealogical notes on Revere and other prominent Huguenots referred to. 

"Henry Laurens, Hist. Mag., X., 234. 

*Tliis vv^as not the only ride tal<:en by the "patriot/ Mercury" for his 
country. In 1774 he carried to N. Y. and Phil, tlie dispatches in regard 
to calling a Congress, and on several occasions toolc messages to Congress. 
He was one of tlie grand jury that refused to serve when Parliament 
made judges independent of the people. Goss, I., 153 and 159, ff.; Mag. 
Am. Hist., XV., 5. 

*He declared that the proposed law for the sequestration of -the 
Tories was not in "the spirit of American liberty." See Huguenot pro- 
ceedings, I.. lOL Congress voted him thanks for his "wise, decided and 
gallant conduct in defending the liberties of his country, his prudent 
and intrepid attack on a party of British troops on the 31st of Aug. last-, 
and for the distinguished part he took in the battle of the 8th of Sep." 
Jour, of Cong., III., 683. 



19 

important deeds of a group of statesmen who profoundly 
influenced state and national development during the "critical" 
and "formative" period. Their work may perha.ps best 
be seen by reviewing, raj^idly and with special reference to the 
part taken by these men of French descent, some of the best 
known events of our history. 

It need detract nothing from the honor we are accustomed 
to pay to those uncompromising Yankee rebels, Samuel Adams 
and James Otis, to recall another, a man of Huguenot ancestry, 
whose share in the events that precipitated the Revolution was 
not less important than theirs, though his name has been suf- 
fered to become less familiar to our ears. Says Winthrop: "If 
Otis' arguments ** breathed into this nation the breath of life, 
few things, if anything, * * did more to sustain that life until it 
was able to go alone, than the answers of the House of Rep- 
resentatives of Massachusetts, to the insolent assumptions of 
Bernard and Hutchinson, mainly draftsd by the same James 
Otis and Samuel Adams, and the answers of the Council, 
mainly drafted by James Bowdoin."' Bowdoin was under- 
stood by the Privy Council in England to be "the leader and 
manager of the Council in Massachusetts, as Mr. Adams was in 
the House. "^ Nor is contemporary evidence to the same 
effect wanting. Hutchinson says: "Mr. Bowdoin was without a 
rival in the Council, and by the harmony and reciprocal commu- 
nications between him and Mr. Adams, the measures of the Coun- 
cil and House harmonized also, and were made reciprocally sub- 
servient each to the other, so that when the Governor met with 
opposition from the one, he had reason to expect like opposi- 
tion from the other."- In 1774, Hutchinson's successor, Gage, 
removed him, acting, as he said, under "express orders from 
his Majesty." When Gage called for the surrender of arms, 
Bowdoin was moderator of the great meeting held in Faneuil 
Hall to consider the demand. He was President of the Coun- 
cil of twenty-eight chosen in 1775 to exercise the supreme 
executive authority of the Province, and in the autumn of the 
same year was chairman of the Massachusetts delegation in the 
conference with Washington and the committee of Congress 

^R. C. Winttirop, Address before tlie Maine Hist. Soc. at Bowdoin 
Col., Sep. 5, 1849. As a descendant of Bowdoin, Winthrop bad access to 
private papers, so tVuit bis address has sometliing tlie cbaracter of 
an original document. 

"Hist, of Mass. Bay III., 293, See also pp, 156, 228, and 374. 



20 

relative to the best means of conducting the campaign. Only 
the illness of his wife, oli account of which Hancock took his 
place at the head of the Massachusetts delegation in Congress, 
prevented his being one of the signers of the Declaration 
of Independence. 1 

In New York, not only were Wm. Bayard and John Jay 
members of the committee of correspondence, but Jay was one 
of the sub-committee to prepare answers to letters received, 
and a letter, "probably from his pen, contains the first propo- 
sition that was made for convening a general Congress to con- 
sider the (present) state of affairs." When the Congress was 
convened, he was one of those unanimously chosen lo represent 
New York. Entering upon his duties in Congress, he was 
placed upon the committee to prepare a memorial to the people 
of British America, "stating the necessity of a firm, united and 
invariable observation of the measures recommended by Con- 
gress," as well as on that which composed the address to the 
people of Great Britain.- B3th these papers were probably 
written by Jay; the latter certainly was, and "is generally ac- 
knowledged to stand first among the incomparable productions" 
of the first Congress.^ Jefferson said before knowing its 
authorship, that it was "a production certainly worthy of the 
finest pen in America."-' The idea of the petition to the King, 
(July 8, 1775), originated with Jay and was carried by him 
against very strong opposition in Congress.^ The double 
honor of being a member of the Provincial Congress of New 
York and of the Continental Congress at the same time, and 
the necessity that was felt for his presence in the former pre- 
vented his being one of the signers of the Declaration of Inde- 
pendence." But the New York convention's resolution of 
approval, (July 9, 1776), was drafted by him, the manuscript in 
his own handwriting being still preserved among the records 
of New York.^ 

'Winthrop, 27. ff.; Bancroft, IV., 242 and VI., 139 and 140. 

''Am. Archives, I., 319, ff.: Jour, of Cong., I.. 19: Jay's Life 
of Jay, I., 24. 

^Webster's Great Speeches, 311. 

*Works, I., 10. 

''Jay's Jay, I., 36. 

"Jay's .lay, I., 43 and 44 

'Correspondence and Public Papers, I., 72. 



21 

The proceedings of the secret committee of Correspond- 
ence "with the friends of America in Great Britain, Ireland 
and other parts of the world," were of great importance in 
securing the friendship of individuals abroad and probably 
prepared the way for the mission of Silas Deane to Prance. 
But so great w^as the secrecy observed that it does not seem 
possible to apportion the honor due to individual members of 
the committee. I see no reason, however, to question the opin- 
ion of his son, that Jay was "the chief organ of correspond- 
ence, "^ especially in view of his later correspondence w^ith 
Deane. On the whole, it seems quite fair to claim that there 
was no pen in Congress more continually and successfully used 
for the country at this period than Jay's. 

That the New Jersey Assembly, disregarding the advice of 
Governor Franklin, gave "express approbation of the meas- 
ures of the Congress" in 1775, is attributed by him to Elias 
Boudinot, afterward President of Congress, and others, who, 
as he says, ' 'came down from Elizabeth Town and caballed among 
the members. ''2 In South Carolina, Henry Laurens was not 
only a member of the First Provincial Congress, but drew up 
the asssociation to be signed by all the friends of liberty, was 
also President of the Council, and later, as is well-known, a 
delegate to the Continental Congress and its President for 
more than a year.^ 

The celebrated Mecklenburg Declaration was drafted by a 
Huguenot, Dr. Ephraim Brevard. Though the claim of some 
that this paper was the original of the Declaration can hardly 
be granted, it w^as doubtless of much importance in fostering 
the spirit of Independence in North Carolina.^ 

1 Jay's Jay, 1.. 64. 
■"Letter from Gov. Franklin, dated Perth Aaiboy, Mar. 12, 1775, in 
New Jersey Archives, X., 575. 

^Am. Cyc. of Bio?., III., 630 and 631. 

I am not ignoranr of the fact that Laurens' patriotism at an 
early stage of the difiiculties has been thought to be open to ques- 
tion. The letter written by him to His Majesty's Secretaries of State 
while in the Tower, as well as private letters written during- the Stamp- 
Act disturbances, are of a somewhat damaging character. They may 
be found hi Hist. Mag., X.. 233.. IT. See also extract from "The Royal 
Gazette," (N. Y., Oct. 14. 1778). on p. 316 of the same Mag. But the letter 
to the Secretaries was the special plea of a man who wanted to get out of 
prison and probably puts his conduct in the best possible light for that 
purpose. There are not wanting indications in his diplomatic cor- 
respondence tiiat he never forgot hiu)self for his country. With that 
limitation— unfortunately not the exclusive possession of citizens of 
Gallic descent— I believe his patriotism to have been sound. 

^Randall, Life of Jefferson, III., 570, fl.; Am. Archives, II., 855 



22 

Not to go further into details, it is evident that in at least 
five of the colonies, the part taken by men of Huguenot 
descent in the events leading to the Declaration of. Independ- 
ence was by no means a secondary one. 

When the young nation was once fairly launched upon 
a war for independence, these men continued the most unre- 
mitting exertions to that end,i but except for the brilliant mis- 
sion of John Laurens to France, there is nothing of such para- 
mount and striking importance as to demand our attention till 
we come to the negotiations preliminary to peace. ^ 

It is, however, worth while to note that young Laurens not 
only obtained a subsidy and the assistance of Rochambeau and 
other officers with land and naval forces, but that he did it by 
the skill with which he broke through all convention alties and 
secured a jjersonal interview with the King, thereby avoiding 
the delays incident upon negotiations conducted through the 
ministry. "* 

and foot note; Winsor. Nar. and Crit. Hist., VI., 256; Hunter, Sketches 
of Western N. Car., 22. ff. and 47, ff.; Sabine, Am. Loyalist, I., 38, and 
articles in Mag. of Atn. Hist., vol. XXI. 

'I find some Huguenots in the list of Loyalists given by Sabine, 
but they do not seem to have been numerous. 

\Such facts as that Gouverneur Morris drew up, the plan 
adopted by Congress for raising funds for army expenses, (Diary and 
Letters, I., 4 and 5;) that he also drew up the instructions to Franklin at 
Versailles in 1778— the first ever sent to an American Plenipo- 
tentiarv (Spark's Life of Morris. I., 188); that Jay drafted the circular 
letter to accompany the resolutions stopping the emission of bills 
of credit in 1779. (Jour, of Cong., III., 350 and 358); that Laurens proposed 
and Hamilton heartily approved a scheme for raising two or tliree bat- 
talions of Negro troops, (Jay's Works, T., 191, ff. and Bancroft, V., 369 
and 370); that Washington obtained through Bowdoin's "confidential 
agency * * * a plan of the harbor of Halifax with a view to its des- 
truction by the'French fleet," in 1780, (Winthrop, p. 29); that on the inva- 
sion of S. Car. in 1779, Manigault, though over 75 years of age. shouldered 
a musket and offered himself and his fourteen-year-old grand-son to the 
service of his country, (Commemoration of Bi-Centennary, p. 54): though 
very interesting, can hardly be said to have had a determining effect on 
the course of U. S. History. It was possibly more important that some 
of the best Revolutionary officers were Huguenots. (Proceedings of 
Huguenot Soc, I., 41. and Cf. Register of Officers). 

'Army Correspondence of John Laurens, p. 31, ff. Congress passed 
the following resolution: "That the conduct of John Laurens in his mis- 
sion to the court of Versailles as special minister of the U. S., is highly 
agreeable to Cong, and entitles him to public approbation," Jour, 
of Cong., III., 683. 



III. THE TREATY OF PEACE. 

/^HE COMMITTEE that negotiated peace with Great 
^^ Britain consisted as finally constituted, of John Jay, 
Henry Laurens. Benjamin Franklin, and John Adams. It 
is, of course, a matter of interest to know just how far we are 
indebted to each of them for the important provisions of the 
treaty. If we accept the views of all who have written on the 
subject, we shall be compelled to believe among other things 
that it was essentially the work of Franklin, ^ that we are in- 
debted for the concessions in regard to the fisheries to Adams, - 
that the glory belongs to Jay and Adams but especially to Jay,^ 
that it was owing to Laurens that the frontiers of the Repub- 
lic were extended to the Mississippi river,* and in this way the 
later annexation of Louisiana provided for, ^ and that on this 
very point "we have greater reason for gratitude to John Jay 
than to either of his colleagues."^ The truth probably is as 
stated by Fiske: "To the grand triumph the varied talents of 
Franklin, Adams and Jay all contributed.'"' 

Yet I venture to hold the opinion that the services of Mr. 
Jay were even more important than those of either of his col- 
leagues, valuable as those doubtless were. The subject cannot, 
as it seems to me, be fully understood without reading the re- 
markable series of letters written while he- was Minister Plenipo- 
tentiary to Spain, as well as the correspondence after his trans- 
fer to Versailles. '^ It must be borne in mind that the ' 'family com- 
pact" between France and Spain rendered it of the first im- 
portance to avoid giving offence to Spain, not only for the sake 

'Parton, Life of Franklin, II, 650. "He saved the alliance over 
and over again and brought the negotiations to a successful close." 

*Life by C. F. Adams, 380, ff. 

'Roosevelt, Life of Morris, 124. 

*Weiss, Hist, of French Protestant Refugees, I., 366. 

'Hinsdale, Old Northwest, 182. 

'Critical Period of Am. Hist., 35. 

^The letters are in Sparks' Diplomatic Correspondence, VII. and 
VIII., and the more Important ones in Jay's Works, I. and II. 



24 

of an alliance with her. but for the continuance of friendly re- 
lations with France. And the fair inference from the way in 
which the Ministers were treated is that neither France nor 
Spain was anxious to secure great advantages for the young 
Republic, and that the latter at least was most unwilling that 
its borders should be extended to the Mississippi. That her 
intention to i:)revent this result was only prevented by Jay's 
firmness and foresight is the conclusion to which one is irre- 
sistibly drawn on reading the correspondence. Nor is there 
more reason to doubt that his courage in accepting the bills 
which Congress, depending on the financial assistance of 
Spain, had drawn upon him, and his skill in securing the 
means to redeem them, probably saved the country from imme- 
diate bankruptcy, which would have been fatal to all hopes of 
indeijendence. 

What was thought of his statesmanship at the time may be 
seen from the letter of Samuel Huntington, President of Con- 
gress, written under the direction of that body, in which he 
says, "throughout the whole course of your negotiations and 
transactions, in which the utmost address and discernment was 
often necessary to reconcile the respect due to the dig-nity of 
the United Slates with the urgency of their wants and the com- 
plaisance expected by the Spanish Court, your conduct is 
entirely approved."^ And later, Robert R. Livingstone wrote, 
•'your conduct through the whole of your negotiations has 
oeen particularly acceptable to Congress."^ 

After he joined Franklin in France his zeal and sagacity 
in securing the ends sought were no less apparent. It is not 
necessary to decide whether Vergennes was more friendly than 
he thought, nor whether Vaughan's mission to England 
was the bit of diplomacy that secured the recognition of 
United States Independence as a preliminary to entering upon 
the treaty. In any case there can be no question that he 
showed great adroitness in his plan for outwitting what seemed 
to him a wily maneuver. And in breaking loose from the 
instructions to follow the advice of the French Court, it was 
Jay who took the lead and almost compelled Franklin to 
follow. He says in his report that Franklin was "fettered" by 

May's Works, II.. 32, dated, "In Cong., May 28, 1781." 

"Jay's Woi'k, II., 188. The letter, Apr. 16, 1782, is in answer to Jay's 
of Oct. 3, 1781. 



25 

them, but that he "could not believe that Congress intended 
that we (they) should follow any advice that might be repug- 
nant to their interest."^ 

Prom all the evidence, then, I feel compelled to infer that 
Jay's influence in keeping the country from utter bankruptcy 
till peace could be secured, in obtaining the Mississippi boun- 
dary, in making the recognition of independence one of 
the prior conditions of the treaty and in breaking away from 
French dictation as to the terms, was second to that of neither 
of his colleagues. The "Yankee shrewdness" which Fiske 
thinks was more than a match for the "traditional French 
subtlety"- was itself of Gallic origin. 

As to the Fisheries question, his share of the merit is not 
so clear, though Hamilton says that the people of New 
England talked of offering him an annual tribute of fish.^ He 
seems, however, at the very least, to have seconded Adams 
very ably in that matter. Speaking in general terms of 
the whole treaty, Adams said that the principal merit was 
Jay's.* And Fitzherbert, in 1853, said that it was "not 
only chief but solely through Jay's means that the negotiations 
between England and the United States were brought to 
a successful conclusion."^ These statements from other chief 
actors in the affair do not seem to me too strong. 

Laurens' part in the negotiations seems comparatively un- 
important. Nor do his letters have the same ring of statesman- 
like and unselfish patriotism as Jay's.'' But in his own opin- 
ion, after being admitted to bail in London, he made many 
converts to the idea of American Independence "among people 
of the first importance.""^ And Bancroft credits him with 
having proposed the clause forbidding the British to carry 
away Negroes or other property.^ However, the work of Jay 
alone during these trying negotiations would compel the 
admission that our national independence with the favorable 

'Works, II., 384. 

"Critical Period of Am. Hist., 24. 

"Hamilton, Worlcs. VIII., 148. 

♦Letter to Jay in 1880, Jay's Jay, I., 418. 

^Windsor, Narrative and Critical Hist., VII., 169: Flanders, Lives 
and Times of the Chief Justices, I., 843 and 351 and foot note. 

^They are in Sparks' Dip. Cor., vol. II. 
'Dip Cor., II.. 466 and 469, ff., Cf. also 482. 
'History, V., 579. 



26 

conditions secured was not altogether an ''-Anglo- Saxon 
achievement. 

Our interest in American history from the stamp-act to-the 
treaty of Paris is apt to center about the stirring events of the 
Revolution. But during' those years the foundations of trans- 
Alleghany commonwealths were being laid with'_aj^heroism 
worthy of the times. Among ^the backwoodsmen- -who '.first 
peopled that region were quite a number -of Huguenots, .and one 
of them, John Sevier,^ was a principal actor in some of the most 
important events connected with state-building there. So that 
not only in the thirteen original colonies, but in some of the 
earliest off-shoots from them, we may trace the influence of 
exiles from France. 

'Sevier's work has been well told by Roosevelt, Winning of tbe 
West, and in Pbelan's Hist, of Tenn. 



IV. STATE CONSTITUTIONS. 
HILE the war was still in progress, most of the states 
formed new constitutions under which they lived for 
many years. Bowdoin was President of the Massachu- 
setts Convention in 1779 and with the Adamses prepared, dur- 
ing" a recess of the convention, a draft which with some modi- 
fications was adopted. Judge Lowell "who was himself second 
to no one iri that convention for the zeal and ability, which he 
brought to the work," says of Bowdoin that "'it was owing to 
the hints which he occasionally gave and the part which 
he took with the committee who framed the plan that some of 
the most admired sections in the Constitution of this state 
appear in their present form. "^ To have been one of the chief 
framers of the Constitution under which — with an occasional 
amendment — the old Bay State has lived and prospered for 
more than a century, is surely no slight honor; but that is not 
all. "The ordinance of 1787 is a condensed abstract of the 
Massachusetts Constitution of 1780. Every principle contained 
in the former either in a germinal or a developed form, except 
that relating to the obligation of contracts, and some temporary 
provisions relating to the organization of the territorial gov- 
ernment is found in the latter, and often in the same 
language."- And since the development of the country west 
of the AUeghanies owes so much to this ordinance, and since, 
further, the Constitution of Massachusetts and hence the 
Ordinance owes so much to a descendant of the Huguenots, it 
may as well be granted at once that some of the most boasted 
characteristics of our national career are due neither to the 
Anglo-Saxon nor to the Dutchman. 

After the new constitution went into effect, Bowdoin was 
appointed with the Justices of the Suj^reme Court, the Attor- 
ney-General, and John Pickering "to revise the laws in force in 

'Winthrop, 30 and 31; Hildreth, III., 375. 

''Dr. Cutler and the Ordinance of 1787, by W. F. Poole. N. Am. Re- 
view, CXXII., 229, ff. The quotation is on page 2r)8. A comparison of the 
Ordinance (Poore. I.. 429—432) with the Cons, of Mass. (Poore, I., 956- 
973) will abundantly repay any student. 



28 

the state, to select, abridge, alter, aticl digest them so as to be 
accommodated to the present government."' Winthrop says: 
"I have seen ample evidence in his papers of the labor which 
he bestowed on the duties of this distinguished' and most 
responsible commission."^ 

In the New York Convention of 1776, Jay and Gouverneur 
Morris were leading members. Jay is said to have prepared 
the draft of the Constitution and his eulogists are probably 
right in attributing its most important features to him, though 
it is difficult to find direct and positive evidence of the fact. He 
made strenuous exertions to obtain a clause excepting Roman 
Catholics from toleration till they should abjure the authority 
of the Pope to grant absolution. The most that could be 
obtained, however, was a proviso — said to have been proposed 
by Morris — and which was retained in subsequent revisions of 
the Constitution, that "the liberty of conscience hereby grant- 
ed shall not be so construed as to excuse acts of licentiousness 
or justify practices inconsistent with the safety of the state," 
and an amendment to the naturalization clause requiring 
all persons to "abjure allegiance to all and every foreign king, 
prince, potentate, and state, in all matters ecclesiastical as well 
as civil," before becoming naturalized citizens. It was also due 
to him that acts of attainder were not allowed to work corrup- 
tion of the blood. It seems quite likely that his urgency 
on this point was due to his knowledge of the wrong endured 
by his ancestors and the ingrained hatred of all that caused 
those wrongs. The restriction of suffrage, in some cases, to 
freeholders was in accordance with his favorite maxim that 
"those who owned the country ought to govern it."^ 

^Address, p. 32. 

^On the points covered by this paragraph, Cf. Jay's Jay, I., 70; 
Roosevelt's Morris, 6(3; and Pellew's Jay, 85-87. 



V. THE NATIONAJ^ CONSTITUTION. 

^^HE WAR being closed and independence secured, it might be 
V^ hoped that the young Republic, entering upon its course un- 
der such favorable circumstances, endowed with such a 
wealth of natural resources, and above all rich in men of such con- 
spicuous ability, would move forward in a path of uninterrupted 
prosperity. But there were only too evident signs of danger 
from within which threatened its very existence. The Confed- 
eracy proved to be a rope of sand, and there was no x^ower to 
cope successfully with the pressing financial and other prob- 
lems. Men of judgment and patriotism were by no means 
agreed as to the wisest measures to be taken. It is a curious 
and, as I think, a very significant fact that, when the Anglo- 
Saxon spirit of localization was endangering the life of the Re- 
public, men of French extraction who were prominent in public 
life expressed with wonderful unanimity^ a belief that a stronger 
central government was imperatively demanded. A few cita- 
tions will establish this point, but I do not propose to discuss, 
still less to answer, the probably unanswerable question, hoio 
far their views were due to inherited and innate tendencies of 
the Gallic mind. As early as 1779, Ellas Boudinot said in 
a private letter: "I am not afraid of the dissolution of the Con- 
federacy in my day, but I dread the consequences on the pres- 
ent basis to posterity. In my weak opinion, Congress has not 
power enough. "2 In 1783, Jay wrote: "I am perfectly convinced 
that no time is to be lost in raising and maintaining a national 
spirit in America. Power to govern tJtit< confederacy as to all gen- 
eral ])urposes should be granted and exercised. The governments 
of the different states should be wound up and become 
vigorous."^ He also urged repeatedly that the construction of 

'One exception ouf?ht to be noted. Tyler in the Va. debates on the 
Constitution dreaded too great centralization as dangerous to liberty. 
Elliot's Debates, III., 637, ff. 

, '-^Hist. Mag., 2nd series, III., 80. 

^Works, (Correspondence and Public Papers). III., 85. See also 14.3, 
172 and 178 for other letters in which he expresses similar views. 



30 

the government was "fundamentally wrong" in not separating 
legislative, judicial, and executive functions; his idea being, if I 
understand him, that a distribution of powers would' make the 
government more energetic and effective. ^ His desire for 
a more highly centralized government is the more noteworthy 
from the fact that he had, as he says, "from early life 
expressed a strong dislike to the arbitrary government of 
Prance," and thought it a government "always dreadful in 
theory and more or less so in practice according to the charac- 
ter of those by whom its power is exercised."- 

Gouverneur Morris wrote to General Greene: "From the 
same attachment to the happiness of mankind which prompted 
my first efforts in this Revolution. I am now induced to wish 
that Congress may be possessed of much more authority than 
has hitherto been granted to them.'"^ His views may be still 
more clearly read in the Journals of the Convention, where, as 
Lodge says, "he favored a vigorous central government, 
opposed bitterly equality of votes in the Senate, and sought to 
weaken the powers of the states."^ 

Lodge says that "from Massachusetts under the lead 
of Bowdoin came the first eJfort for a better union in the form 
of instructions to her representatives to urge the necessity for 
a new convention upon Congress. "^'^ The first expression of 
such necessity doubtless came from some other source, though 
Winthrop says that Pelatiah Webster, one of those who are 
credited with it, was a friend of Bowdoin's.*^ But, howev^er 
much or little credit we may give the latter in initiating 
the proceedings, the fact of his strong recommendation to the 
legislature establishes the point I am urging, namely, that he 
favored greater power in the central govornment. And if, as 

^Works, III.. 210, 226, 234. He repeats the same views, after 
the adoption of the Constitution, in his charge to the Grand Jury on his 
Eastern Circuit, Works, III, 387. 

=* Works, IV., 199. 

^Diary and Letters, I.. 15. This was in 1781. 

^Atlantic Monthly, LYII.. 436. For his remarks in convention see 
Scotfs edition of Madison's Jour.. 57, note, 285, 310, 361, etc. 

"Life of Hamilton, 53. 

'Address, 43. Burgess says. (Political Science and Constitutional 
Law, I., 101 and 102), that Bf)vvdoin and Hamilton were more far-seeing 
than the rest of the statesmen of the day and "discovered the root of the 
ditticulty, viz.: that the sovereign, the state, had no legal organization In 
the svstem." 



31 

Hart thinks, the success of Shay's rebellion would :have made 
the union "not worth one of its own discredited notes,'"^ he has 
a still greater claim upon our gratitude. 

But unquestionably the most thorough centralizer of them 
all was "America's greatest political genius," Alexander- Ham- 
ilton. Before, during, and aftar the Convention, he expressed 
in the most explicit terms his belief in the necessity of a strong 
central government and of the danger to be apprehended from 
giving too much power to the states. In his letter to Duane in 
1780,- in his series of papers, the Continentalist,^ in the resolu- 
tions he introduced in Congress in 1783,^'in«the debates of the 
Convention,^ in the n Federalist, ^^in his:] speech on the revenue 
system in the New York Legislature in 1787,'^ in fact every- 
where throughout his works, we may read hisodread of state 
sovereignty and of power entrusted to the people. 

Two only of these men were members of the Convention, 
Morris and Hamilton. As to the former, it may be said that 
the impression made by an examination of the debates is that 
he influenced the course of proceedings, jDerhaps as much 
as anyone. To this may be added the opinion of Madison, that 
he wa,s an "able, active and eloquent member. "'^ To him'also 
we owe, as regards the language of the Constitution, "that 
admirable perspicacity which has so much diminished the 
labors and hazards of interpretation for all future ages.^ 

A iirst hasty reading of the debates is likely to prove dis- 
appointing to anyone brought up on the tradition that to Ham- 
ilton, more than to anyone else, we owe the frame of govern- 
ment under which we live.-'j But further stady is reassuring. If 

formation of the Union, 113. 

''Works 1203, ff. Garfield says of him, "in camp before he was twen- 
ty-one years old. upon a drum-head, he wrote a letter whicli contained 
every germ of the Constitution of the United States. '" (In speech to the 
"Boys in Blue" N. Y., Aug. 6, IS^.O. quoted by Hinsdale in preface 
to Garfield's Works, p. XIX). I think he must refer to the Duane letter, 
but Hamilton was twenty-three at that time. 

^Works, 231, ff. 

*Works, I., 288, ff. 

"Elliot, I. 417, ff., and Madison Papers, II., 244, and elsewhere. 

^No. XVII.. for example. 

'Works, II., 16, fl. 

^Letter to Sparks, Elliot, I., 507. 

^Curtis Hist, of the Cons., I., 297. Cf. Madison's letter quoted 
above, and Morris' letter to Pickering, I. 506 and 507. 



32 

the eleven propositions which he submitted to the Convention^ 
do not seem to be of superlative importance, the speech by 
which he supported them was one that, as is evident from the 
draft what remains to us^ must have carried great weight, 
especially when coming from a man of so vigorous a personal- 
ity. And the full plan of a constitution that he gave to Madi- 
son^ presents with, it is true, many points of divergence, points 
of coincidence with that finally adopted, so many and so strik- 
ing, as to force the conviction that it must have been known to 
the Committees who drafted the different articles and must have 
modified the result to a large extent. We must rem^ember, too, 
that by this time his views had probably become well known to 
most men in public life and could not have failed to influence 
some of them. There is a tradition that he did much in private 
conversation, during the time the Convention was in session, to 
"filtrate" his ideas through the material of the Constitution.'* 

The splendid services of Jay and Hajmilton in securing the 
adoption of th^ Constitution have never been questioned. The 
numbers of the Federalist written by them are enduring monu 
ments of their work.-"" In the Massachusetts Convention that 
ratified the Constitution, both James Bowdoin and his son made 
speeches in its favor. ^ 

To sum up the fragmentary details, I am thoroughly con- 
vinced that, for the advocacy of "a more perfect union," for 
efforts to obtain a convention with that end in view, for 
able and influential services during its sessions, and for vigor- 
ous and successful efforts to secure the ratification of the Con- 
stitution, we Bjre more indebted to four men of Huguenot ances- 
try, James Bowdoin, Alexander Hamilton, Gouverneur Morris, 
and John Jay, than to any other four statesmen of the time.'^ 

'Elliot, I., 179. or Madison Papers. 185, ff. 
= Works, I., 353, IT. 

^Works, I., 334, ff. It may also be found in Supplement to Elliot, 
App., 585, ff. 

^Morse Life of Hamilton. I., 184. 

"See also. Jay's Address to tlie people of N. Y., Works, III, 294. Cf. 
Jay's Jay, I., 260-262 and 269; Elliot, II., 283, ff. 

For Hamilton's work in N. Y. Convention, Elliot, II., 231—369. 

•^Elliot, II., 81: 125, and 178. 

Revere had sometliing to do with securing Samual Adams', at first 
doubtful, support. Goss, II., 451., ff. 

'To Morris also we owe the suggestion for our decimal system 
of coinage, tliougli liis plan received important modifications from Jeffer- 
son before it was adopted. 



VI. THE EARLY DAYS OF THE CONSTITUTION. 

BUT no plan of government, even if it be "the most won- 
derful work ever strack off at a given time by the brain 
and purpose of man," will execute itself. And "the 
more perfect union," which owed so much to Gallic brains in 
its inception, might have been as disastrous a failure as the 
old Confederacy, had not those same brains devised the meas- 
ures for its workings in its early years. To tell adequately 
the part taken by these men, especially by Jay and Hamilton, 
during the first deca,de of the constitutional period would be to 
rewrite the history of that decade. For present purposes, it 
it will suffice to assume the facts known to every reader of our 
national history, in order to trace their effect in the evolution 
of that history. 

We are apt to think of Hamilton as the man who "smote 
the rock of the national resources and abundant streams of 
revenue gushed forth." The idea, which I believe to be alto- 
gether correct, that all his work tended toward centralization, 
though advanced by some writers, is not so prominent in the 
popular thought as it deserves to be. That it was, in fact, a 
deliberate purpose with him, to effect that endacan hardly be 
doubted by any one who makes a study of all his writings. 
His dread of giving too much power to individual states, his 
desire to make the central government strong and controlling 
must impress the most casual reader. That, to some extent, 
"he builded wiser than he knew" is very probable.^ 

His schemes for assumption and funding — too well known to 
need exijlanation here — though strenuously opposed at the 
time, are now generally admitted to have been, from a financial 
standpoint, eminently wise. Indeed it would seem that there 
was no escape from repudiation except through some system 

'Jefferson says, (Works III., 461), that the object of Hamilton's 
plan was to subvert the principles of the Constitution, and that this was 
to be done by corrupting the Legislature. Something must be allowed 
tor the political animosity of the two men. but it is doubtless true that 
he desired to make more prominent those principles of the Constitution 
which Jefferson wished to make less prominent. 



84 

of funding, and no other workable plan was suggested by any 
one.i His first report on Public Credit will probably always 
remain a financial classic. Had lie done no more than to res- 
cue the country from impending financial ruin, and to lay the 
foundation for business prosperity, he would deserve our last- 
ing gratitude. But the assumption of state debts by the gen- 
eral government was, if not the first step, certainly the first 
prominent and important step, in that process of centralization 
which is, perhaps, not yet completed. That this result was 
not absent from his thought, (though he could hardly have had 
a full conception of the far-reaching consequences of his plan), 
is evident from the fact that he distinctly proposes as one of 
"the great and invaluable ends to be secured by a proper and 
adequate provision, at the present period, for the support of 
public credit,'' this, "to cement more closely the union of the 
states. "2 

His next important measure, the National Bank, still 
further assisted the process of centralization, and that in two 
ways. First, by the direct strength it brought the govern- 
ment, a strength which can only be realized in connection with 
later contests over a national banking system, and second, (and 
this is much more important), through the doctrine of "implied 
powers" then, apparently for the first time broached and 
made operative.'^ Undoubtedly it did much to widen the 
breach between Federalist and An ti- Federalist. But, far more 
than that, it was the entering wedge of the principle that the 
"ins" of whatever party have ever since found it convenient to 
use, and that the "outs" have as often opposed. It is a prin- 
ciple, too, whatever we may think of its constitutionality, upon 
which many of the most beneficial measures of the government 
must rest for their defense. Nor did his opponents or the 
friends of his measure fail to understand their probable effects. 
On the one hand, it was claimed that the doctrine of implied 

'Works, II., 47, ff. ; Am. State Papers Finance, I., 15, U, 

^Works, I., 52. His dread of a dissolution of the union, unless prop- 
er revenue measures were adopted, comes out in his speech on the Reve- 
nue System in the N. Y. Leg., 1787. Works. II., 16, flf.— see especially p. 
43; all his important reports may be found in Am. State Papers on 
Finance, I. 

^Hamilton's report is in his Works, Til., 125. ff., and his reply 
to Jefferson's and Randolplrs constitutional objections, 180, ff. The 
latter is far more important for the student of constitutional questions, 
being the first and one of the ablest expositions of the fundamental doc- 
trine that has been so large a factor in political controversy ever since. 



35 

powers "establishes a precedent of interpretation leveling all 
the barriers which limit the powers of the general government 
and protect those of the state Government;"^ "that the admis- 
sion of this doctrine destroys the principle of our government 
at a blow, it at once breaks down every barrier which the Fed- 
eral Constitution has raised against unlimited legislation;"'- and 
that some of the arguments involved "a very dangerous con- 
struction of the powers vested in the General Government. "^ 

On the other hand it was argued that it was impossible to 
carry any jDrovision into execution "without this reasonable 
latitude of construction," and that powers had already .been 
exercised by C(mgress which had been "deduced * * 

by necessary implication;"-^ but at the same time it was ad- 
mitted that "the advocates of this measure * * being those 
who in general advocate national measures * * are charge 
with designs to extend the j^owers of the government anduly.""' 

The report on Manufactures, though it had no immediate 
effect on legislation, has nevertheless been the armory from 
which the chief weapons for the defense of the protective sys- 
tem have been drawn; and it is perhaps not too much to sup- 
pose that its etfect, though not so easily traceable, has been 
quite as great as that of his other papers. Certainly in so far 
as its principles have been adopted, thej'' have tended to the 
growth of the national power which he so earnestly advo- 
cated.^ 

Not only did he mark out in these three papers a national 
policy of finance that has moulded much subsequent history, 
but even in some of the details of administration, his system 
has been followed by every Secretary since his time.' 

It was through these financial measures that his most im- 

^Madison, Benton's Abridgement, I., 278. The whole speech, 274, ff., 
is worthy of study. 

=Stone of Md.; Benton. T., 293. 

sjackson of Ga.; Benton, I.. 286. 

^Boudinot; Benton, I., Ames expressed similar views, 278, flf. 

'^Lawrence of N. Y.; Benton, I., 284. 

^Tlie report wliicli was made to tlie House. Dec. 5, 1791, is in 
his Works III.. 294, ff. As early as tlie time — 1774— when he wrote 
his "Full Vindication," Works. I., 3, ff., he thought we might live without 
foreign trade and tliat manufactures, once established, "'would pave the 
way still more to the future grandeur and glory of America, and by 
lessening its need of external commerce render it still securer against 
the encroachments of tyranny." Works, I., 18. 

^Bolles, Financial Hist, of the U. S., (1789—1860.) p. 17. 



36 

portant work was done. Yeb his influence as a Federal leader 
and his statesmanlike foresight, shown in his views on many 
public questions,^ must not be forgotten. Perhaps there is no 
better summing up of the conclusion to which one must be led 
by the study of his letters and papers in connection with the 
history of the times, than that of Prof. W. G. Sumner; "the 
contest with anarchy and repudiation was the great work 
which went to the making of this nation at the close of the 
last century, and Alexander Hamilton was one of the leading 
heroes of it."^ 

It must be admitted, however, that Hamilton's influence 
upon political life was not altogether beneficent. We may, in 
.deed, dismiss as unfounded the charge of his enemies that he 
wished for the destruction of the Republic and the establish- 
ment of monarchy. 3 The trade of votes between different sec- 
tions of the country by which he secured his financial meas- 
ures* may possibly have been a justifiable compromise. And 
his conduct in the Presidential elections of 1796 and 1800 is 
perhaps for the most part defensible, though it is theuparty 
manager rather g than the statesman that appears in it. But 
his proposal to Jay, then Governor of New York, to secure the 
re-election of Adams by a sharp maneuver with the legislature 
is utterly indefensible and his reasoning is precisely that of 
the time-serving politician, although he disclaims all desire to 
have anything done "which integrity will forbid."'' Consider- 

*The scope of this paper forbids a detailed study of these points, 
the more so as able writers have already given attention to the subject. 
Some papers of liis especially worthy of note in this connection are the 
letter to Harrison Gray Otis concerning the acquisition of Florida and 
Louisiana, written in 1779. (Works, YIII., 523 and 524): his remarlcs 
on aiming at an ascendency in American affairs. (Federalist. No. XL). 
which seems almost to entitle him to the credit of being the inventor Of 
the Monroe Doctrine; and the Camilhis papers in defense of Jay's treaty. 
(Works, IV., 371, ff., and V., 1—3.32.) 

^Life of Hamilton, 13. 

"King said that he disapproved of the sclieme for a Northern Con- 
federacy. See New England Federalism. 148. And in his Report on 
Manufactures there is a very interesting passage in which he deprecates 
the idea of a ''contrariety of interests between the North and South." 
In the much talked of Miranda affair, it was the participation of the gov- 
ernment for which he wished. See letters to Rufus King and to Miran- 
da, Aug. 22. 1798, Works, VIIL, 505—507. 

*"The Potomac Trade." See Jefferson's Works, IX., 92, ff. 

*The electors in N. Y. at that time were chosen by the Legislature. 
A plan to have them chosen by districts had been defeated by the Feder- 
alists at the previous session, on the ground that it was unconstitutional 
(Hammond. Political Hist, of N. Y., I., 133). When it appeared from the 



37 

ing such a deed in connection with the weight that his ability 
and unquestioned services to the country have given to all his 
acts there is reason to feel that he was to some extent respon- 
sible for debauching the public conscience and that his ex- 
ample has encouraged later and lesser politicians to go still 
farther in the ways of doubtful political morality.^ 

Jay's public services after the adoption of the Constitu- 
tion were performed in the capacity of Chief Justice of the 
United States, from 1789 to 1795, of special envoy to Great 
Britain in 1794 and 1795, and of Governor of New York from 
1795 to 1801. H:s brief tenure of office as Chief Justice was 
made practically briefer yet by his mission to England. Be- 
side that, the nation was still too young to furnish many of the 
complicated problems of our later jurisprudence. Nevertheless 
he left his mark on our judicial history. It is well known that 
the decision that a state was suable by the citizens of another 
state led to the eleventh amendment of the Constitution. 
"What is not so generally known, but is much more important, 
is, that by this first notable decision of the Supreme Court the 
subordination of the State to the Nation was established as a 
constitutional principle. Jay's discussion of sovereignty, his 
historical exposition of the way in which the people of the 
United States established a Constitution ''by which it was their 
will that the state government should be bound, and to which 
the state constitutions should be made to conform," and his 
conclusion that the ' 'sovereignty of ttie nation is on the people 
of the nation," and only the "residuary sovereignty" in the peo- 
ple of the state ought not to be overlooked in any study of the 
development of the spirit of nationality.'-^ Had the decision 
been different, had the doctrine of States Rights been recog- 
nized at the outset by the Suj^reme judicial authority, it is at 

results of the spring elections that the new Legislature would support 
Jeflfersonn, Hamilton proposed to Jay to call the old Legislature together at 
once and secure the appointment of electors by districts, which it 
was thought would give the election to Adams. Hamilton's Works, 
YIII., 549, ff. Jay's endorsement upon the letter, "proposing a measure 
for party purposes which I think it would not become me to adopt," 
(Jay's Jay, I., 414), well illustrates the moral difference between the two 
men. 

^Jefferson said he was "so bewitched and perverted by British ex- 
ample as to be under thorough conviction that corruption was essential 
to the government of a nation," (Works, IX., 97). He also plainly im- 
plies that the Bank was intended to control the action of Congress, p. 95. 

^The opinion may be found in his Works, III., 453, ff., and 2 
Dallas, 419, flf. 



38 

least supposable that the conflicts of succeeding years would 
have led to an early disruption of the Union. 

No other question of paramount constitutional importance 
seems to have come before him for decision. ^ Scarcely less 
important, however, is the fact that as "Chief Justice of his own 
state and of the United States, he impressed Grand Jurors and 
all concerned with the necessity of encouraging a profound 
respect for law and constitution in the new order of things, 
and at the outset, through his own personal dignity and integ- 
rity gave character to our high(^st courts since traditicmally 
preserved."'-' 

Jay's treaty with England excited violent opposition at the 
time so little seemed to be gained in comparison with what was 
granted. Opinions regarding it will always differ, probably, 
since the question is largely whether war, especially in view 
of the probably resulting alliance with revolutionary France 
would have been a national calamity. But in view of his long, 
tedious, and so eminently successful negotiations in the Revo- 
lutianary period, it will not do to assert, as does one historian, 
that '"he had always been a timid negotiator on America's be- 
half."^ Neither does his correspondence in connection with 
the treaty justify such a statement."^ His own opinion that no 
more favorable conditions were at that time attainable,-' is also 
entitled to some weight. It should not be forgotten, either, 
that in the course of negotiations with England for twenty-five 
years subsequently this nation scored no very marked suc- 
cess. ^ It was necessary to demonstrate our claim to be a great 

'His charge to the Grand Jury at Richmond, (Works, III. .'478, ff.), 
is considered by Pellew to liave placed our international relations 
on a legal basis. It may be questioned, however, whether that was really 
done till actual questions came up for adjudication. H. L. Carson says, 
(Supreme Court of the U. S., 160, flf.). tliat the first important cause (Geo. 
V. Brailsford and others, 2 Dallas, 40, ff., and 415, ff.). involved the theory 
that tlie treaty of peace was part of the supreme law and could not be 
restricted in its operation by state action or state laws. 

'^Johnston, Preface to Jay's Works. 

\Schouler, I., 293. 

Mm. State Papers, Foreign Relations, I., 470—525. The more im- 
portant letters are also in Works, Vol. IV. 
nVorks, IV.. 138. 

•"'It is a little remarkable that no subsequent arrangement with 
Great Britain has been equally advantageous." Dwight, Hist, of Hart- 
ford Convention, 51. 

"Jay's treaty was a masterpiece of diplomacy, considering the time 
and circumstances of the country." Sumner, Life of Jackson, 12. 

See also Jay's Jay, I., 378, for the commercial privileges and the 



39 

nation before that claim was accepted. That Jay's Treaty se- 
cured a period of comparative quiet, in which the national life 
had time to mature, is its chief, and probably a sufficient de- 
fense. 

The most important — from a national point of view — of 
Jay's actsswhile Governor of New York has already been 
noticed. In general it may be said, that his political conduct 
was dictated by a high sense of honor and a lofty patriotism. 
He always refused to use his influence with the President or 
the heads of Departments in securing appointments to office.^ 
When in 1792, by methods since quite familiar to the citizens 
of New York, the office of Governor to which he had undoubt- 
edly been chosen was given to his opponent, the popular indig- 
nation was so great that a word from him would probably have 
led to methods for redressing the wrong as illegal as those 
which procured it. ^ That in a state and nation just learning 
the difficult lesson of self-government, such a course would 
have fostered a disposition to exercise a sort of political lynch 
law can hardly be doubted. So that his holding his followers 
to a reverence for law i was not the least of his services to his 
country. Again, in his refusal on moral grounds to suj^port 
one of the candidates of his party and in his published vindi- 
cation of his course, he pointed out, with a clearness that has 
not been imjjroved, the somewhat difficult line between party 
fealty and personal independence.^ 

The reader of Morris'' diary and letters is at once im- 
pressed by the fact that he was of all our Revolutionary Hu- 
guenot statesmen the most thorough, man of the world, and in 
so far the most tyjDical Frenchman. Possiblj^ it was owing to 
this characteristic that he was able to overcome some of the 
difficulties incident to the position of Minister at the Court of 
Versailles during the trying period of the French Revolution. 

large indemnities received by Am. merciiants under the treaty. It is of 
interest to note that the claims were prosecuted in the English Admir- 
alty Courts by another Huguenot, Samuel Bayard. (Proceedings of Hu- 
guenot Soc, II., 144.) 

^Jay's Jay., I. 281. 

"For an account of the fraud, see Jay's Jay, I., 284, ff. 

'He says "we are and will be. faithful to the * * party, but we 
will also be faithful to our sense and conviction of what is decent and 
becoming for us to do. Adherence to party has its limits, and they are 
prescribed and marked by that supreme wisdom which has united and 
associated true policy with rectitude and honor and self-respect." This 
was in 1812. Jay's Jay, I., 449. 



40 

He was probably the only ambassador who was able to remain 
during the Reign of Terror. ^ His principal work was the 
management of our debt to France and the protesting against 
outrages upon our commerce. To have obtained just satisfac- 
tion at that juncture would doubtless have been out of the 
question for any one. Not to "sacrifice personal or national 
dignity"- was clearly a work of some importance and one for 
which there were few Americans of the time so well fitted. 

After his return to this country he served an unexpired 
term of three years in the Senate but without any noteworthy 
connection with measures of far-reaching importance. His 
sympathies were strongly Federalist and at one time he evi- 
dently desired a union of the northern states against adminis- 
tration measures.^ 

Boudinot remained in Congress for two terms after the 
adoption of the Constitution and the meager details given in 
the Annals of Congress show him to have taken an active part 
in the questions that came up for consideration. We have al- 
ready seen that he favored Hamilton's financial measures. On 
another great Constitutional question — that of removal from 
office — he argued in favor of giving that power to the Presi- 
dent alone, and thought the efficiency of the government 
might depend on the determination of the question.^ 

Bowdoin recommended to the Legislature of Massachusetts, 
as early as 1786, measures for the protection of manufactures, 
mentioning iron and wool as of especial importance, and under 
his lead the Legislature passed a bill to counteract the restrict- 
ive policy of foreign nations. The operation of the bill was to 
cease whenever Congress should receive power to take the 

^Diary and Letters, I.. 576. Lodge asserts it as a fact, Atl. Monthly, 
LVII., m. 

'See entry in his Diary, II., 70, Oct. 12, 1794, the day of his leaving 
Paris. He says he "would have gained everything," if the Am. govern- 
ment liad refused to recall him. His recall was not due to any dissatis- 
faction on Washington's part with him or his conduct of affairs. See 
Writings of Washington, XII., 433, ff. Lodge in the article cited above 
makes a much stronger presentation of the case for Morris than I have 
done. Wliile not questioning his opinion, I have found no evidence by 
which I can reach his conclusion independently. 

'Diary and Letters, II., 542, 545, 546, 547, 551, ff., will give an idea of 
his political views. 

His biographers and eulogists represent him to have been the origi- 
nal proposer of the Erie Canal. (Sparks, I., 495, ff.; Roosevelt, 359; and 
Lodge in the article already cited.) Evidence aeainst his claim may be 
found in Vol. II., of the Publications of the Buffalo Hist. Soc. 

^Elliot, IV., 357, ff., and 389, ff. 



41 

matter under national control. For this early recommendation, 
Winthrop thinks he should be considered the grandfather 
of the American system, whoever may rightfully claim to be its 
father. ^ 

The views of the Huguenots on the question of slavery 
should not be passed without notice. Anthony Benezet, who 
devoted his life to the cause of religion and humanity — largely 
in connection with this question — was a Huguenot. His work 
was chiefly done before the Revolution, but he is said to have 
had a personal conference with every member of the Pennsyl- 
vania Legislature that passed the act of gradual abolition 
in 1780.- Manigault refused to traffic in slaves and treated his 
own with kindness.^ Henry Laurens wrote to his son in 1776, 
expressing in unmistakable terms his abhorrence of slavery 
and his determination to free his own slaves as fast as 
possible.^ Freneau also wrote against slavery."* 

In the Constitutional Convention, arguing for representa- 
tion according to the number of free inhabitants, Morris declared 
he would never "concur in upholding domestic slavery,"' charac- 
terized it as a nefarious institution and "the curse of Heaven 
on the states where it prevailed.'' Hamilton had previously* 
moved a resolution for representation on that basis.' but 
he was absent from the convention for several weeks including 
the day. August 8/ on which the discussion took place, and this 
accounts for his taking no part in it. His sentiments may be 
easily inferred from the fact that the Manumission Society 
made him one of their counsel in 1798.** He was also one of the 
petitioners who declared to the New York Legislature in 1786 
that the men held as slaves by the laws of New York were free 
by the laws of God.^** Boudinot's strong anti-slavery views 



'Address, 44, ff. 

^Wilson. Rise and Fall of the Slave Power. I., lo. 

'Lee, II., 77. 

*An extract from the letter is given bj' Greeley, Am. Conflict. I., .'}6. 
footnote. 

"Proceedings of Huguenot Soc, II.. "1. 

^Madison's Journal, 478. 

^Madison's Journal, 76. 

'Sumner, Life of Hamilton, 134, says he was absent June 29-Aug. 1.3. 

'Works, (J. C. Hamilton's ed.), VI., 268. 

">°Goodell, Slavery and Anti-Slavery, 97. He refers to MSS. of Wm. 
Jay. 



42 

come out clearly in the Congressional debates on the slave 
trade. ^ 

But it is John Jay of whose opinions on this subject 
we have the fullest record. In the New York Constitutional 
Convention, Morris introduced a recommendation to future 
Legislatures to take measures for the abolition of domestic 
slavery, but it was not adopted. Jay. who was absent at 
the time and seems not to have known of the proposition, 
wrote to Livingston and Morris that he should have been "for 
a clause against the continuance of domestic slavery."- Writ- 
ing from St. Ildefonso in 1780 of the plan for gradual abolition, 
he said: "Till America comes into this measure, her prayers 
to Heaven for liberty are impious. This is a strong expression, 
but it is just. Were I in your Legislature I would prepare a 
bill for this i:)urpose with great care, and I would never cease 
moving it till it became a law or I ceased to be a member. I be- 
lieve God governs the world and I believe it to be a maxim in 
His as in our courts, that these who ask for equity ought 
to do it. "■■* Notwithstanding these strong expressions he made 
no recommendations for such a measure in his first message after 
he became Governor of New York. In the opinion of ^ his son, 
he refrained from doing so from a belief that, in the state 
of politics, such a proposition from him would arouse party 
antagonism.^ At any rate, early in the session an intimate 
friend of his introduced a bill for gradual emancipation. It was 
defeated, as were two subsequent attempts, but in 1790 such a 
bill actually passed. "Probably," says his son, "no measure 
of his administration afforded him such unfeigned pleasure." 
He was the first President of the Manumission Society and 
himself purchased slaves for the purpose of freeing them.'' 

Prom the above survey, it is quite evident th^t for 
the curse of slavery left as a legacy by the Revolutionary 
fathers we are not indebted to statesmen of Huguenot descent. 

It thus appears that for invaluable services during the con- 

'Especially Annals, II., 1466, ff. 

-Works, I., 136, and footnote. Also Morris, Diary and Letters, I.. 7. 

'Works, I., 407. The letter was to Egbert Benson. 

*Tlie opposition to him at a former election was largely on account 
of his views on this question. Jay's Jay, I., 284, ff. For the history of 
his connection with tlie bill, see I., .390-408. 

^For such facts and for valuable expressions of his views, Cf., Jay s 
Jay, I., 230, ff., and Works, IJl., 185, 340, ff., IV., 430-432. 



43 



test for Independence, for wise contributions to State and 
National Constitutions, and for important measures in the 
early years of the nation's life, we owe a large debt to the 
descendants of French Protestant refugees. Were this study 
to be carried through our later history, it would include the 
work of our second martyr President, of Gallatin, Poinsett, the 
Bayards, and many another. Were it to include the labors of 
men outside of political life, the names of Maury and Agassiz 
in science; of the philanthropist. Gallaudet; of the railway 
magnate, Chauncey Depew; of the founder of the Chautauquan 
movement; of the poets, Longfellow and Whittier; and— by no 
means least— of the Historians who have done more than 
all others to familiarize us with the character and heroic deeds 
of the Huguenots, the Baird brothers, would need to be 
mentioned. Nor would this exhaust the list. The longer one 
investigates, the clearer it is that in every honorable walk of 
life our Huguenot fellow -citizens have attained distinction. In 
any accounting for the forces that have made us, Gallic brains 
and character must be held to have been of incalculable value. 



II. THE FRENCH CATHOLICS. 

I. THE OLD NORTHWEST. 

^^HE story of the exploration and settlement of the North- 
er' west and the Mississippi valley by the French is one of 
the most romantic in onr history. But it would be quite 
irrelevant to repeat it here. The fact of French occupancy is 
all that is essential for present purposes — a fact not likely soon 
to be forgotten, since from Lake to Gulf our national map 
is liberally bestrewn with names whose Gallic origin is not to 
be concealed even by our grotesque Anglo-Saxon mispronun- 
ciation. 

When the region known as "the old Northwest'" passed 
under the control of the United States, the population was 
almost entirely French. ^ Their principal settlements were 
Detroit and its immediate vicinity, Vincennes on the Wabash, 
and the Illinois villages, Kaskaskia, Cahokia, Prairie du Rocher, 
and Prairie du Pont. We should then expect to find marked 
traces of their influence on the early political life of Michigan, 
Indiana, and Illinois. Ohio was settled later, mostly by immi- 
grants from the older states, so thfit we should hardly look to 
find the French a political factor in that state. In Wisconsin 
there were scattered forts but no extensive settlements. ^ 
Moreover that state was much later in its political development. 

It is impossible to determine exactly the number of French 
inhabitants of the region. It is probable, however, that about 
the time of the French and Indian war they numbered not. far 
from 10,000 souls, but there was considerable loss of population 
prior to the Revolution.^ 

'King's Ohio, Chap. YIII.; Western Reserve Hist, and Arch. Tracts, 
No. 55, The State of Ohio—Sources of her Strength, by Chas. Whittlesey. 

^See Turner, The Character and Influence of the Indian Trade 
in Wis., J. H. U. Studies, 1891; Draper, early French Forts in Western 
Wisconsin, Wis. Hist. Coll., X. 321, ff.: and Neill, Notes on Early Wis. 
Explorations, same Vol., 292, ff. 

'I have examined a large number of reports, travellers' accounts, and 
histories, on this point, with no very satisfactory results. The 



45 

When Geo. Rogers Clarke made his expedition to the Illi- 
nois and Wabash regions in 1778 — the expedition that secured for 
Virginia and hence for the United States the possession of that 
country — he was so fortunate as to conciliate the French 
priest, Father Gibault, who gave the most valuable proof 
of his loyalty by securing the release of Vigo. The latter, 
a St. Louis trader, had been taken into custody by Hamilton, 
though apparently without justitication under the laws of war, 
and was held at Vincennes. Father Gibault placed himself at 
the head of the French inhabitants after service on Sabbath 
and marching to the fort threatened to cut off all supplies from 
the garrison unless Vigo were released. Once set free, Vigo 
hastened to Clark with information that enabled him to march 
against Hamilton with success, thus completing the conquest 
of that part of the territory. In the opinion of Judge Law. 
"Next to Clark and Vigo the United States are indebted more 
to Father Gibault for the accession of the states comprised in 
what was the original Northwest Territory than to any other 
man." In view of all the circumstances, this does not seem an 
exagerated estimate of the value of his services, for there can 
be little question that the French were in position to turn the 
scale in favor of either party. ^ 

It is not a little curious, however, that almost equal credit 
is due to another Frenchman, a Protestnnt and a son of Hugue- 
nots exiled from their historic city, LaRochelle— Charles Gra- 
tiot. When the army was in danger of starvation he "made 
himself accountable * * to the full extent of his vast estate for 



statements are contradictory and in no case based on reliable statistics. 
Some of I lie estimates are undoubtedly guess-work. Cf., Walker, Tlie 
Northwest during the Revolution. Mich. Pioneer Coll.. III.. 12. If.: Hins- 
dale, The Old Northwest. 48; Roosevelt, Winning of the West. I.. 33 and 
35, with footnotes; St. Clair Papers; Scharf. Hist, of St. Louis. TB: 
Burnet, Notes on the Northwest, 31 and 2SS: and the Ftistories of Ran- 
dolph and St. Clair Counties. 111. (It is claimed that these two histories 
are based, so far as possible, on original data, many old and valuable 
MSS., botli I'rench and English, having i^een examined. I have found 
them more relialile than the ordinary ciuinty histories, i 

'Cf.. Hinsdale, Old Northwest. l.'jH; Law. .Vddress on tlie Colonial 
Hist, of Vincennes. .\pp. ;")."). ff.: Roosevelt. Winning of the West. II. tis. 
Hamilton himself gives "among reast)ns not mentioned on 
the face of the capitulation * * the certainty of the Inhabitants 
of the village having joyned the rebels." He also pays his respects to the 
priest as the ••wretch * * who absolved the J^'rench inhabitants from 
their allegiance to the King of Great Britain." Report, Haldimand 
Papers, given in Michigan Pioneer Coll.. IX., 489. ff. 



46 

the supplies." Had it not been for this generosity, the cam- 
paign would very likely have been a disastrous failure.^ 

In Michigan there was less opportunity for active sympa- 
thy with the colonies and the French took no decided stand. - 

Immediately after Clark's campaign, Virginia undertook 
the government of the conquered country and in the fall of 
1778, Col. John Todd was made County-Lieutenant. To his 
"Record-Book." fortunately rescued from a mass of paj^ers 
used for fuel in the courthouse of Randolph County, 111., we 
are indebted for the most that is certainly known about the his- 
tory of the territory during his administration. •* There is 
nothing to indicate that the French concerned themselves 
much about the government, although in accordance with his 
instructions, Todd held an election for Judges, all of whom 
w^ere chosen from among the French settlers. All the officers 
appointed by Todd, except Winston, the commandant at Kas- 
kaskia, were also Frenchmen. Roosevelt says the "Judges 
governed their decisions solely by the old French laws and 
customs."^ One incident given in the Record-Book is fairly 
typical of their attitude when the task of self-government was 
laid upon them. During one of Todd's absences, the Judges 
adjourned court to what seemed to him too distant a day. 
"Pleasure first had always been the rule in Kaskaskia, and to 
compel a man to hold court when he preferred to smoke 
a pipe in the sun or go fishing was an unreasonable hardshii3." 
But on his return they were ordered to hold court at no distant 
day and doubtless complied with the demand.'^ 

^Reynolds, Pioneer Hist, of 111., 256 and 257. Washburn, who mar- 
ried Gratiot's grand-daughter, quotes him, Wis. Hist. Coll.. X.. 240 
and 241. so that it must liave been a family tradition. Neither Gratiot 
nor Gibault secured any substantial reward for his services, though both 
made some effort to do so. In regard to Gratiot's claim, Cf., with refer- 
ences previously given., Billon Annals of St. Louis, 214 and 215, 221-225, 
and Hist, of St. Clair Co!, III.. 45. In regard to Gibaulfs. St Clair Papers, 
II., 179. All the French settlers were generous in support of the expedi- 
tion and most of them were never reimbursed.— St. Clair Papers, II., 168. 

'^Hinsdale says, p. 159, that "in the far north the French were more 
favoralDly disposed toward the Britisli,"' though "tlie officers complained 
of * * * (their) apathy.'' Cf., CamplDell. Early Frencb Settlements in 
Mich., Pioneer Coll., II., 95, ff. He says there were some indications of 
sympathy with the United States, p. 103. 

■'^For an interesting account of the book, now in the possession of the 
Chicago Hist. Soc, see Illinois in the Eighteenth Century, 49. Its sub- 
stance is given in the succeeding pages of that valuable little tract. 

"Winning of the West. II., 171. He refers to State Dept. MSS. No. 48. 

^Illinois in the Eigliteentli Centui'V, 61. 



47 

After Todd's departure in 1780 there was very little civil 
government, but the local officials, in imitation of practices 
observed among the English, indulged in gigantic land specu- 
lations, granting to each other large tracts of land under the 
pleasing delusion that their powers in that directic^n were 
unlimited.' 

The Virginia cession brought tlie territory undei' the direct 
control of the United States. The successive divisions of the 
territory, the different stages of territorial government, and 
the advance to statehood of the five commonwealths carved out 
between the Lakes and the Ohio, are in their general features 
well known. For a minute study of their national relations, 
recourse must be had to Congressional documents. Consider- 
ing the fact the French continued for many years to be a large 
proportion of the population,- we should expect to find numer- 
ous and important references to them. Such an expectation is 
not realized, however. The student of their part in the polit- 
ical development of these states is compelled to learn from 
what can not be found rather than from what can be. Such 
explicit allusions to them as occur in the Annals of Congress 
and the State Papers of those early years may be grouped 
under two heads. In the first place there are acts and petitions 
relating to land and land titles. The Ordinance of 1787 secured 
to "the French and Canadian inhabitants and other settlers of 
the Kaskaskies. Saint Vincents, and the neighboring villages, 
who have heretofore professed themselves citizens of Virginia, 
their laws and customs now in force among them relative to 
the descent and conveyance of property. ""•^ Further provision 
was made by acts of Congress. June 20 and August 29. 17Hl-(, 
for confirming in their possessions such as had professed 
themselves citizens of the United States or any of them on or 
before 17H8. At the same time a tract of 400 acres was granted 



'Law, Col. Hist, of \'iiicennes. A])))., \\., 110. tt'.:St. Clair Paper. II.. 
1(59: Am. State Pai)ers, I'ublic Lands. J., 111.: Roosevelt, Wiiiniijg of llie 
West, II., 181 and 182. referring: to State Dept. MSS.. .30 and 4S. 

"There are no exact and reliable statistics on this point. I 
have come to the conclusion stated after exaTiiininof official lists of voters 
at different elections, proyjerty-holders. militia companies, and the like, 
and comparing them with statements found in contemiioray letters. 
The following references are of vahie: The Indiana Oazetteer. 97. 
98. 41."): Hist, of St. Clair Co.. 70. 124, 125: Mich. Pioneer Coll. 1.. 
345. VIII.. 50. tf.: .").30. ff.. r,VA. and XII.. .508. tf. 

^Poore. Constitutions. 1.. 429. 



48 

to each head of a family among such citizens.^ There were 
other acts of Congress and a long ser.es of petitions and deci- 
sions in regard to land titles, showing plainly the effect of the 
French system of land-tenure, and of Ihe different grants mider 
which lands were held, in complicating the titles. But none of 
these were of more imjjortance in our national history than or- 
dinary private land bills. - 

In the second place, we find that there were petitions pre- 
sented by the French settlers for the publication of the laws in 
their own language. But these are of interest only as showing 
that they were still thoroughly French and unable to under- 
stand the legal terms of the government under which they 
lived. ^ 

It has sometimes been held that the French were largely 
responsible for the attempts to fasten slavery upon Illinois and 
Indiana. It is a fact that slavery was first introduced by 
them.^ It is also true that the Ordinance of 1787 was held not 
to be retrospective, so far as they were concerned, though 
many of them at first moved across the Mississippi lest they 
should lose their slaves under it — and in short that the valid- 
ity of French slavery was never questioned."^ 

The movement for the legalization of slavery in those 
states appears in the national records in the form of petitions 
for the suspension of the sixth article of the compact. A care- 
ful examination of all the petitions, remonstrances, and 
reports — so far as they are printed in the public documents — 
discloses not the slightest reference to any French settlers as 
such. Two things may, however, indicate their jiresence and 
possible influence. First, there were petitions from the Illinois 
counties, (Randolph and St. Clair), in which the French villages 

'Journal of Cong., IV., 82H, ff.. and 858; St. Clair Papers, II., 
1(55 and note. 

^Tliese decisions about land titles among the French occupy a very 
large space in the early State Papers on Public Lands. 

Interesting particulars about land grants and titles may be found in 
Col. Hist, of Vincennes. App.. IV.. 106 and VII.. 136 and 137; Mich. Pio- 
neer Coll., I.. 341. ff.: VIII.. 5-19, ff.; XIV.. 643, ff.: Hist. St. Clair Co., 
74 and 75; St. Clair Papers. II.. 104. ff. The lands granted to the French 
passed out of their hands with great rapidity. 

''St Clair Papers, II.. 179. Their petitions were not granted. See 
Am. State Papers, Misc., II.. 71. 

^By Renault in 1720. See Reynolds, My Own Times, 207. 

=On these points. Cf.. St. Clair Papers. II.. 117. ff.. 119. 176, 318. 319, 
330. ff.; State Papers, Public Lands, II., 103; Scharf. Hist, of St. Louis, 



49 

were located. Second, in the petition to the Fourth Congress, 
the petitioners say they are sure that ''if the people then in the 
territory, (/. e.. in 1787). had been called upon to make such a 
compact, they would never have consented to enter into 
one that would deprive them of their most valuable prop- 
erty."^ And one petition from the Legislature of Indiana re- 
cites that in 1787 slaves "were generally possessed by the citi- 
zens then inhabiting the country." Of course we know that in 
both those cases the original settlers were French. And it is 
quite clear that their presence with slaves afforded a pretext 
for the still further introduction of slaver3^ On the other 
hand, the reasons most urged for the suspension of the article 
were, that it would be better to have the black population more 
diffused, and especially that it was[ desirable to encourage im- 
migration from the slaveholding states. - 

All these attempts failed and slavery was never legalized 
in any part of the terlntor3^ except in so far as has been 
already indicated. But an effort was made to make it legal in 
Illinois after her admission as a state. The Constitution 
of 1818 had a clause prohibiting slavery "hereafter," which was 
so construed that slaves previously held were not liberated. 
Very soon Missouri became a state with slavery legalized in its 
borders. Emigrants from the other slave states with their ne- 
groes began to pass through Illinois on their way to the 
new state and were not slovv' to remind the people of the former 

I.. 272: Dunn. Indiana, 239; Mich. Pioneer Coll.. XII., 511. tf. Tins last is 
a decision of .Judge Woodward to the effect that slavery was legal under 
Jay's treaty for previous settlers. Some of the shiveholders at the time 
of the treaty were British, however. (T. M. Cooley, Michigan, 132.) 
There was also a decision in 1807 that ''except as to persons in tlie actual 
possession of British settlers in the territory on the 16th of 
June, 179(i,"' ''a right of property in the human species can not exist.'" 
(Mich. Pioneer Coll., XII., 519, ff. It is printed from the ^ISS. opinion 
of the Chief Justice in the i)Ossession of Midi. Hist. 8oc.) It cannot have 
been true therefore in Midi., liowever it may have been in other states, 
that slavery was permitted for the special benefit of the French. 

'State Papers, Public Lands, I., (il. The four signei's of this petition 
"for and on belialf of the people of those counties were none of them 
French. They petitioned also the ()th and the 9th Congress. (Annals btli 
Cong.. 735, and 9th Cong., 848). Dunn says tlie signatures to the 
petition to tl)e (ith Cong.. 270 in number, were mostly French. He 
refers to the original on the Senate tiles. (Indiana, 298). 

^Annals 9th Congress as above: State Papers, Misc.. I., 407. See also 
speeches (tf Douglas and Chase on the compromise measures of 1850, 
(Cong. Ulobe, 31st Cong.. 1st sess., App., 304, ff., and 408. ff.) Both 
of them dwell at some length on these early attempts to legalize slavery 
but neither of them alludes to the French settlers. Douglas says, p. 309, 
that ''the people were mostly from the slaveholding states." 



50 

that the constitutional enactment concerning- slavery alone 
prevented their remaining east of the Mississippi.' Beside 
this many of those already settled in Illinois were from slave 
states and felt that slavery would be an advantage to them.-' 
An attempt was therefore made to procure a Convention for the 
amendment of the Constitution in the interests of slavery. 
The movement was precipitated by the Governor's recommen 
dation of a law for the liberation of slaves held by the 
French.^ But when the vote was taken St. Clair County 
gave the heaviest vote against it. and that vote was deci- 
sive.-* It is hardly probable that the French settlers voted 
against the measure. Indeed, Brown says, they were --the nat- 
ural allies of the conventionists and desirous of their success." 
But I have found no evidence that they inaugurated the move- 
ment or that when it was once begun they were very active in 
its support. The brief outline that is here given covers 
the essential features of both the earlier and the later move- 
ments so far as they relate to the subject in hand. And 
it seems to indicate that the presence of French slavery 
was made a pretext by later settlers for pressing a demand for 
the legalization of the institution. Further, we must infer — it 
is mainly inference — that when it came to political action the 
French acted, so far as they overcame their inertia enough to 
act at all. with the supporters of slavery. But "the active and 
dangerous championship of slavey in the Northwest did 
not come from the French inhabitants."' Moreover, the 
history of the Kansas struggle suggests the strong prob- 
ability that had there been no French slavery, no toleration of 
it as an inheritance from former claimants of the territory, 
border states like Illinois and Indiana would not have escaped a 
contest upon the subject. It is noticeable in this connection 
that, not only did the northern states, Michigan and Wisconsin, 

'Brown, Early Movement in 111. foi the Leffalization of Slavery. Ki 
and 17. Brown was a participant in the strnsig-le and therefore must 
have known its causes. See also Wilson. Hist, of the Rise and Fall 
of the Slave Power, I., J(i3. 

■-'Early Western Days, by .J. T. Kingston: Wis. Hist. Coll.. 2!).-^. ff. 
See 298. ff., and 31.'^. ff., for an account of the slavery movenient. King- 
ston's father was a resident of Kaskaskia at the time and he himself was 
old enough to have some personal recollections of the matter. C'f., IV.VA. 

^T.rown, Hist. Sketch, 20. 

■'Early Western Days, 315. 

'Hinsdale, Old Northwest, 351. 



51 

have no such struggle, but that the other border state of 
the Northwest, Ohio, was the object of desire on the part 
of slaveholders.' Furthermore, there are indications that 
slaves were actually introduced into Illinois and Indiana by 
other than French settlers.- It is therefore highly probable 
that the location of Illinois and Indiana had much more 
to do with the etforts to legalize slavery in their borders than 
had French influence. 

The local government of the Northwestern states, by the 
provisions of the Ordinance was copied from the older states, 
and there is no evidence that it received any important modifi- 
cations from French ideas. In so far as the older states were 
Anglo-Saxon in their local institutions these were also.^ 

It has already been mentioned that Todd's appointments to 
office were mostly from the French and the same is true of St. 
Clair's early appointments, but he speaks of the difficulty of 
finding persons "in any degree qualified to hold the necessary 
offices." In the succeeding years of his administration French 
names are less frequent in the lists of officers.^ In later his- 
tory the records show surprisingly few French names."' And 
when the State Constitutions were formed there were hardly 

'Burnet, Notes on the Northwest. 30(i. They were Va. otticers who 
wished to remain with their slaves on the bounty lands in Ohio. The 
Ordinance and the state of public feeling -Ohio, it will be remembered, 
had received large immigration from New England— prevented. 

^From statistics in Niles' Register, I.. 388 and 389, I find that 
in Knox Co., Iiid.— in which the French settlers were located — the 
slaves were 28 in ISOO. 1.35 in 1810. 'Sow as the American population was 
gaining, the French declining, this increase of slaves could not be from 
further French immigration. As it obviously was not simply their nat- 
ural increase, they must have been introduced by the Americans. Still 
further, the other counties, Clark and Harrison, which were unsettled 
in 1800. had 102 slaves in 1810. St. Clair Co.. 111., had none in 1800, -1 in 
1810. Randolph Co., on the other hand had 107 in 1800, 12 in 1810. 

\See Howard. Local Cons. Hist, of the F. S.; Shaw. Local (lover n- 
ment in 111.. (J. H. U. Studies. First Series); Bemis Local Govt, in Mich., 
(.7. IL U. Studies. First Series): Spencer Local Gov't in Wis. (Wis. Hist. 
Coll.. XL, 502, ff.). Cf., the Constitutions in Poore. 

''St. Clair Papers, IL, 172 for quotation. P'or lists of appointments. 
1, 131. 311, 322, 323. .324. 330, 344, and footnotes. 

^Many of the authorities consulted give lists of Territorial and 
early state otticers. Among others, Atwater's Ohio; Tuttle's Michigan: 
Histories of Randolph and St. Clair counties: Mich. Pioneer Coll.. I. and 
VIIL In pursuance of an act of the Mich. Leg., S. D. Bingham com- 
l)iled a volume of Mich. Biographies, in 1888. "to preserve in compact 
form the record of Statesmen, Judges, and Legislators of Mich." It is 
very noticeable that the French riames are very few. Some that do ap- 
pear are of immigrants from the eastern states, one at least being of 
Huguenot descent. See p. 223. 



52 

any men of French parentage in the conventions.^ One French- 
man. Father Gabriel Richards of Detroit, was chosen Territorial 
Delegate — in 1823 — from Michigan, though singularly enough 
his support was only in small part from the French. During 
his term he exerted himself in behalf of the Indian tribes of the 
Northwest and at his instance appropriations were made for 
the opening of several roads leading into Detroit, thus hasten- 
ing the material development of the region. His services were 
so satisfactory that he would have been re-elected had not his 
own countrymen defeated him — though only by about half 
a dozen votes — from the notion that a priest had no business in 
a legislative body.- This incident points to united action 
on the part of the French. And as late as 1831. a meeting was 
held at Frenchtown to endorse the nomination of Austin 
E. Wing as Delegate to Congress, which was evidently a meet- 
ing of Frenchmen and intended to influence French votes. ^ 
Various scattered and indirect allusions tend to confirm 
the idea that when they dia rouse themselves to political 
action they •'i)ulled together. "-^ 

But while the direct and positive influence of these people 
was so slight, they were, nevertheless, a factor to be reckoned 
with. The great divergences of their customs from those of the 
Americans caused many inconveniences. Though they are almost 
uniformly represented to have been well disposed toward the 
United States government and to have become faithful and at- 
tached citizens,"' there were frequent complaints from them 

^The Constitution of Indiana is. with signatures, in Nile's Register, 
Xlll., 85, ff.. of 111., in XV.. 9.3. ft., and of Mich., in XLVIIL. 34o. flf. It 
is to be remembered, too. that the region had not been long enough 
settled by Americans to have given men of mixed parentage to the con- 
ventions, even if intermarriages at an early day had been more frequent 
than there is reason to suppose. 

''Life and Times of Rev. Gabriel Richards. bvJ. A. (rirardin. Midi. 
Pioneer Coll.. I.. -181. tT. 

'^Micli. Pioneer Coll.. XII.. 5H9 and 570. They say they look upon 
Wing "as a genuine republican, educated in the Jeffersonian school." 
He was the man who defeated Richards at a former election. 

*Much of the material upon which positive conclusions on this point 
might be based is either entirely lost or is at present inaccessible. It is 
much to be desired that local investigators should hunt out and make 
available all such bits of local history. Until this is thoroughly done, a 
complete political history of tlie Northwest cannot be written, and one's 
conclusions on some vital points nnist be merely tentative. 1 have en- 
deavored, however, to weigh carefully all the evidence within my reach. 
Such as it is. it ])oints to the conclusion I have indicated. 

^Cf., Tuttle, Hist, of Mich., 114 and 115; St. Clair Papers, II., 27, 31, 



53 

of the changed order of things in legal matters. To wait 
•"the slow, tedious progress of an American court"' was felt to 
be a hardship by a people accustomed to the summary decision 
of a Commandant. 1 And the American judges experienced so 
much difficulty from being unacquainted with the ronfiimr 
(Ic Paris that Judge Woodward suggested the desirability of a 
small representative body to be associated with them, that they 
might better understand the feelings of the people in regard to 
proposed changes. - 

They were also easily impressed with the idea that some of 
their cherished customs would be interfered with. A sugges- 
tion by Judge Symmes to the Detroit Grand Jury that it was 
not needful to spend so much time in their religious duties was 
supposed by some to be an "'attempt to put down their 
religion," and the Judge was obliged to make an exx)lanation 
from the bench. =* Taxes, too. were an abomination to them. 
In 1802. Sibley wrote to Judge Burnet: "Nothing frightens 
the Canadians like taxes. They would prefer to be treated 
like dogs and kenneled under the whip of a tyrant, than 
to contribute to the support of a free government."-^ And in 
1809, some of the inhabitants of Michigan having petitioned 
for a change to the next grade of government, sent a second 
petition retracting the lirst one, saying they made it ' 'without 
duly considering and understanding the subject," and that 
•'their number is still too small for the second grade of govern- 
ment * * * or any other which would subject them to any 
expense in supjDorting a Legislature." There are no signatures 
to this pai)er. but the letter accompanying it says: "The most 
numerous class of the inhabitants, who are Canadians,'" 
are 'totally opposed" to a change of Government and also the 
majority of the Americans.""'' 

But the most noticeable peculiarity of the French, politi- 



;ind .33; Patrick Henry's letter of instructions to Todd, (given in Hist, of 
Randolph Co.. 90. ff.;) Mich. Pioneer Coll.. I., 361, VII.. 510, f., II., 103: 
The Red Book of Midi.. 43(i. For a ditTerent view, see Early Western 
Days, 299, ff. 

^Burnet. Notes on the Northwest, 282, footnote: Col. Hist, of Vin- 
cennes, 42; Yolney's View, .372. 

'Am. State Papers, Misc., I., 4(Jl. This was in 1806. 

'Notes on the Northwest, 282. footnote. 

^The letter is in App., H., of Burnet's Notes. 

''The petition and letter are in Mich. Pioneer Coll.. VIII., 594, ff. 



54 

cally speaking, was their unwillingness and unfitness to assume 
the duties of citizenship. When Volney visited Vincennes in 
the last century, the Americans there complained to him that 
the French "understand nothing of political, civil or domestic 
affairs. * * * Their first demand was for a commanding 
officer, and it was the most difficult thing possible to make them 
comprehend anything of a municipal administration chosen 
by and from among themselves. Even now they have no per- 
sons fit for forming one."^ This political inertia is mentioned by 
nearly every writer. And in one notable instance their unwill- 
ingness to assume the duties of self-government retarded 
by nearly a decade the political advancement of a common- 
wealth. In 1H18 it was found that the jDopulation of Michigan 
was sufficient for the second grade of government, but the 
proposition to establish it was voted down by a large majority, 
and it was not till 1827 that it was secured. The defeat is 
ascribed on good authority to French votes. Says Campbell, 
speaking of their lack of political training under a paternal 
government: "Those who reached middle age before the peo- 
ple of the Territory became entitled to vote for their own 
officers were not always pleased with the change, and some of 
those who survived to a very recent period never ceased 
to sigh for the good old days when the commanding officer was 
the whole government. - 

* 'View of Climate and Soil of the U. S., 373. flf. 

^Political Hist, of Midi., 392. The book was published in 1876. The 
autlior's oi^portunities for learning the facts from those who were active 
in political life at the time make his testimony on such points especially 
A'al liable. 



y 

II. THF: LOUISIANA PURCHASE. 

-^'URNING now to the regions included in the Louisiana 
^' i^urchase, we tind that there also the 2:»opulation was pre- 
dominantly French when the United States obtained con- 
trol.^ From the first there was jealousy between the French 
and American citizens. Laussat, the prefect who had handed 
over the government to the United States, thought the errors 
of our government could hardly have been worse.- It is 
possible that the dissatisfaction of the French was manufac- 
tured or at least fostered by him and other officials. At any 
rate there khis considerable dissatisfaction. No sooner had 
Congress made provision for the temporary government of the 
Territory of New Orleans, than the people of the territory re- 
monstrated.-^ They show in this remonstrance an unwilling- 
ness that former customs and laws should be changed as well 
a feeling that they were not being dealt with according to the 
terms of the cession. They also request the appointment of 
officials who can speak the French langauge. The narrative 
of events at that time, as given by Gayarre, tends to the im- 
pression that intriguing politicians of American birth had 
gained an ascendancy over the Creoles and were using this 
dissatisfaction for their own ends. The Territory was organ- 
ized under the terms of the act, notwithstanding their objec- 
tions, but early in 1805 by a further act^ they were put on 

'Clairborne reported to the wSec. of State, in 1809, that there were, 
b.y a census taken in 1806, 52,998 inhabitants. The wliite population was 
2("i,0(i9, of whom at least 13,000 were natives mostly of French descent, 
about 3,500 natives of the U. S., the rest mostly Europeans, part of them 
French. The letter is quoted by Gayarre, Louisiana under Am. Domi- 
nation, 211, ff. Jefferson's report to Cong., Annals, 8 Cong., 2 sess., 1506, 
gives somewhat different estimates, but they are confessedly not exact. 

-His report to the French government, in which he instances some 
things which he thinks might have been better done, is quoted by 
Gayarre, 7, ft'. 

"The remonstrance presented to the Senate may be found in Annals, 
8 Cong., 2 sess., App., 1597. That to the House, 1608, ff. 

^Annals, 8 Cong., 2 sess.. App., 167-1, ff. 



56 

nearly the same tooting as other Territories. Concerning this 
change. Claiborne wrote: "The people have been taught to 
expect greater privileges and many are disappointed. I 
believe, however, as much is given them as they can manage 
or as they ought to be trusted with until the limits of the ceded 
territory are acknowledged, the national attachments of our 
new brothersless wavering, and the views and character of 
some influential men here better ascertained.'"' 

But notwithstanding some complaints and jealousies of the 
Americans, there is no reason to think that the French were at 
heart disloyal. In 1806 Claiborne wrote of them: '"My opinion 
of the native Louisianians has always been the same; a majori- 
ty are well disposed, and were it not for the calumnies of some 
Frenchmen who are among us, and the intrigues of a few am- 
bitious, unprincipled men whose native language is English. I 
do believe that the Louisianians would be very soon the most 
zealous and faithful members of our Republic." He adds, how- 
ever, "Until a knowledge of the American govornment, laws, 
and character is more generally diffused among the people you 
cannot with certainty count ui)on their tidelity.""- 

At the time of the Burr conspiracy, the Legislative Coun- 
cil were "convinced that it is not among the ancient inhabi- 
tants of this territory that proselytes had been made to such a 
project and that there was no perfidy, no treason to be ap- 
prehended from tbem."^ 

Disloyalty was indeed alleged against them in the war of 
1812 but with insutticient reason. Half the Committee of Pub- 
lic Defense for New Orleans in 1814 were French.* And "if 
New Orleans and the Creoles had been unpatriotic. Gen. Jack- 
son would have been at their mercy.""'' 

The same peculiarities that marked the French of the 
Northwest are to be found also among these Creoles. They 



'Quoted from Ex. Jour, by Gayarre, 67. 

'■'Quoted by Gayarre from Ex. Jour., 159. 

'Quoted by Gayarre, 177. 

*See signatures to their address to the people, Latour's Hi.st. of the 
War in West Florida and Louisiana, App., XIV. 

^Maurice Thompson, Hist, of Louisiana, 215. See also his discus- 
sion of the whole subject, 211, ff. He speal<s of the services of French 
vohinteers and of French women who did brave worl< as hospital nurses. 
His opinion is that disloyalty was rather against state than U. 8. govern- 
ment. Cf..lngersol, Hist, of the War in 1812, IV., Chap. II. His conclu- 
sions seem to be substantially the same as Thompson's. 



0{ 

petitioned for the use of their own language by officials,^ were 
unable readily to reconcile themselves to the slow administra- 
tion of justice and to tiial by jury and great difficulties arose 
in the adjustment of land titles.- The same unwillingness to 
be taxed and the same indifference to the right of citizenship 
may be seen also. In 1808 the Legislative Council said that 
the people "felt the imposition of taxes as a great hardship." 
And a year later Claiborne urged that feeling and their neglect 
of political duties as reasons why they should not assume the 
task of self-government. He quotes from "a very respectable 
and influential planter" that "the taxes already imposed by 
the Territorial government were as great as the people could 
conveniently meet and that no change was for the present de- 
sirable." As to their political inactivity, he instances cases 
where less than thirty out of two hundred voters exercised the 
right of suffrage, and says "it has seldom happened that at 
any election, however contested, a majority of the voters have 
attended the polls. "^ 

The question whether the ordinance of 1787 was applicable 
to Louisiana came up in 1805 and agents for the inhabitants 
argued that it was not.^ Its principles must have been par- 
ticularly distasteful to them. But the enabling act of 1811 re- 
quired some of the provisions, which the ordinance had 
secured to the people of the Northwest, to be incorporated in 
the Constitution; the fundamental principles of civil and re- 
ligious liberty, trial by jury in criminal cases, and the privi- 
lege of habeas corpus.^ 

Of the forty members of the Constitutional Convention in 
1812, twenty-two were of French origin; and of the seven who 
drafted the Constitution, four were French, if the indications 
of name can be trusted." Some slight traces of their probable 

'See remonstrance before alluded to and Am. State Papers, Misc.. 
II., 51 and 52. 

^Breckenridge, Views of Louisiana. 143 and 144. His book, pub- 
lished in 1814, was founded on observations made in liis own travels. 
This Chap., VI., is also printed in Niles' Reg., I., 243, ff., so that it must 
have been written as early as ISll. On land titles see State Papers, Pub- 
lic Lands, II. 

^These various quotations may be found in Gayarre, 192, 211, flf. 

*State Papers, Misc., I., 418. 

"Poore, I.. 699. For opinions as to their unfitness for self govern- 
ment, see debates in Cong, in 1804, Benton's Abr., III. 

*Marbois, Hist, of Louisiana, .339, and Gayarre, 272. 



58 

influence appear in the Constitution, noticeably the large pro- 
perty qualifications for some official positions, and the exclu- 
sion from office of any •'clergyman, priest or teacher of any 
religious persuasion, society, or sect."^ That in general 
features it should be like those of the older states, was neces- 
sary to secure the assent of Congress. 

It is well known that the Louisiana Code is founded largely 
on the Code Napoleon. But the Common Law is so univer- 
sally accepted in the United States that, while the Civil Law 
has to be recognized in suits concerning Louisiana, it has had 
no appreciable effect on the jurisprudence of the country at 
large. -^ 

A majority of the members selected for the legislative Coun- 
cil of the early Territorial government were taken from among 
the Creoles and in the early history of the state they had the 
principal voice in the towns and a majority in the legislature.** 
Out of the first eight governors, three were of French origin. 
As late as 1859 there had been but one gubernatorial election 
in which at least one of the candidates was not a Frenchman."* 
But the oiily man of mark among these early officials was 
Francois Xavier Martin, the jurist and historian. 

The Frenchmen of the Northwest and the Mississippi val- 
ley then were, as a rule, patriotic and peaceable citizens.-^ 
They have added numerous picturesque features to our history 
and our landscapes. They still furnish us bits of dreamy 
European and mediaeval life in the midst of our wide-awake, 
progressive, nineteenth century, Anierican civilization. The 
New Orleans of today is a foreign and an old-time city, while 
mediaeval France yet lingers in the Illinois country. Little 
more than a decade since, a traveler to that region said of Kas- 
kaskia, there "is little to disturb the impression that it is still, 
the Kaskaskia of the olden time," and of Prairie du Rocher, 

•Poore, I., 702. 

*Some account of the "Digest of Civil Laws'' of 1808 and some inter- 
esting particulars of the growth of jurisprudence may be found in 
Louisiana Hist. Coll., Part II., 22-25. But for the material on which this 
paragraph is founded I am especially indebted to Hon. W. S. Pattee. of 
the Law School of the Univ. of Minn., wlio kindly gave nie information 
not accessible in print. 

^Gayarre. 19 and 68, Brecl<enridge, 139: Martin in a letter of July 22, 
1818, an extract from which is given in Hist. Mag., VIII., 241, IT. 

^See table of popular votes for Gov., 1812-1864. Hist. Mag., IX., 373. 

"Reynolds, My Own Times. 79, says they were never intemperate in 



u 



59 

"It is as if a piece of old Prance had been transplanted to the 
Mississippi a century since and forgotten; or as if a stratum of 
the early French settlements at the Illinois a hundred years 
ago or more had sunk down below the reach of time and 
change, and with its ways and customs and people still intact 
had still pursued its former life unmindful of the busy nine- 
teenth century on the uplands above its head."^ 

Again the records of early explorations and early history 
that have come to us through them are of much value. Much 
of our knowledge of Indian habits and language are from the 
same sources. And when the minute details of local history 
in the Northwest and the Mississippi valley have been fully 
investigated, it will probably be found that many episodes in 
that history were due to their presence, their customs, or 
their idioms of language — as was the case with the Iowa and 
Missouri boundary war. But their contribution, in any large 
sense, to the political development of those regions can not 
be reckoned of vital importance. Their political activity — 
what there was of it — was mainly in the line of opposition to 
the unfamiliar ideas of an advancing civilization. At some 
points they may have stayed for a little time — and only for a 
little time — the chariot wheels of progress. But for that fact, 
tu'ey might almost be omitted in writing the political history 
df our country. 



drink, that tbey rarely engaged in common broils or personal combats, 
and tbat no Creole was ever hung or sentenced to tbe penitentiary in 
111. For interesting particulars about their customs, see Chaps. VIII. 
and XII.. of his book: Monnette, Hist, of the Miss. Valley. I.. 181, flf.; 
Burnet. Notes on the Northwest, 281. ff. footnote; Reynolds' Pioneer 
Hist, of 111.: Maria Hamlin, Legends of Le Detroit: Old French Tradi- 
tions (same author): Mich. Coll.. IV., TO, f. Wallace, Illinois and Louisi- 
ana under French Rule, last chapter; Scharf, Hist, of St. Louis, Chap. 
XII. I consider the last the most satisfactory account. 

'Illinois in the Eighteenth, Century, 21 and 45. 



COMPARISON AND CONCLUSION. 

♦«rn reviewing and comparing the facts adduced in the forego- 
II ing study, the two main lines of French immigration to 

this country present a striking contrast. The Huguenot 
— as a Huguenot, a Frenchman — is and has been for many a 
decade practically forgotten. ^ His descendants speak the same 
language as the descendants of the Puritan and the Cavalier. 
They mingle with them in the mart, the Senate House, and the 
place of worship, and are practically undistinguishable from 
them.- No peculiarity of costume or manner calls attention to 
them as a people of alien race. The worthy deeds of their Rev- 
olutionary ancestors are reckoned to the credit of the Anglo- 
Saxon race, and the very Constitution tha.t those ancestor did 
so much to fashion and the national career that owed so much 
of its early success to their guidance are vaunted as the pecu- 
liar glories of the same race. That our debt to the Huguenots 
is a great one is a fact that does not lie upon the surface 
history. It is indeed only beginning to be recognized. 

The traveller through the Atlantic states must needs look 
carefully to find traces of these early French immigrants; the 
traveller in certain parts of the Northwest and of Louisiana 
must needs close his eyes, if he would forget the fact of French 
occupancy. 

But the peculiar feature of the contrast is, that the Hugue- 
not who seems to have disappeared and left no trace behind 
him, proves on careful investigation to have made a mighty 
impress upon our national history, the records of which 
fill many of the most valuable and fascinating pages of our 
public documents; while the Frenchman of the Northwest, 

'The organizotion of the Huguenot Soc. and the researches of indi- 
viduals have done much of late years to call them to mind, but for most 
people, the fact stated in the text is doubtless still true. 

'There are still a few Huguenot churches in the U. S., the most im- 
portant being in N. Y. city and in Charleston, S. Car. For some particu- 
lars, see Introd. to A^ol. I. of Huguenot Coll. and Bi-Centenary Com- 
memoration, 8, 51, 63, 65, and 68. Their very existence is probably 
unknown to the majority of well informed people. 



61 

whose picturesque and romantic memorials are so abundant, 
has left no enduring mark and the pages of the national 
records in which he appears are of little value in the study of 
our growth into a nation. 

It is a pertinent and perhaps a timely question, why this 
difference? Why should people of the same race, coming 
to the new world at so nearly the same time, differ so widely in 
their influence upon the young nation of which they became a 
part? 

To some the off-liand, easy answer may seem to be the true 
one. "The Huguenot was Protestant, therefore progressive; 
the other was Catholic, therefore reactionary." But an answer 
based on hasty generalization and religious prejudice cannot be 
accepted as final; especially as on the surface of history there 
is no evidence that the moving force of Hamilton's career, for 
instance, was an absorbing devotion to Protestantism. 

On the other hand, there can be no question that the 
Protestant Reformation in France was a mighty link in 
the chain of causes that have led to our national greatness. 
The Huguenots were tested and sifted by fierce religious perse- 
cutions, and when at last the infamous Revocation drove them 
from their native land, it was verily a chosen remnant that 
sought these western wilds. Let Pilgrim or Puritan boast— as 
he may— of the zeal for religious freedom that exiled him from 
home, the Huguenot can point to yet a nobler record of 
unswerving devotion to principle. 

Yet further, it was not true, as it has been so often 
elsewhere from the days of the primitive church onward, that 
••not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not 
many noble were called;" the best blood of France flowed 
in the veins of the original Huguenots, and when they came to 
America. • "they brought with them * * an ancestral influ- 
ence of education, refinement, and skillful enterprise, as well 
as of religious fidelity. ""^ 

Hence if the doctrine of heredity be admitted to have any 
force, we may partly understand how the graceful diplomat up- 
holding his country's honor with skillful tact at a court where 
all was chaos should be of a race celebrated for its ease 



'R. S. Storrs, The Early American Spirit and the Genesis of it. 51: 
see. also, an eloquent passage in Schatt's address on the Hist, of the 
Edict of Nantes. Huguenot Proceedings. TI.. 101, ft" . and another in 
H. M. Baird's address at the Bi-Centenary. p. 38. * 



62 

and polish of manners; how the founder of our financial pros- 
perity should be descended from a race of people renowned for 
their success in amassing wealth; and above all how the suc- 
cessful statesman who carried his honor so unsullied through 
all his political life that '-when the spotless robe of the judicial 
ermine fell upon him, it touched nothing less spotless 
than itself," should trace his ancestry to a refugee to 
whom freedom of conscience and loyalty to principle were even 
dearer than was the historic city so beloved by every Protes- 
tant in France. 

Their influence has been altogether disproportioned to 
their numbers, for in "determining the character of a country, 
a hundred selected men and women are more potent than a 
thousand men and women taken at random. ""^ 

The French of the Northwest and the Mississippi valley 
were of an altogether different type and their occupancy of the 
country was due to far other causes. Whether from the lower 
strata of society, or as in some cases from the higher grades, 
they were uneducated and unused to self-government. They 
were in general well disposed, cheerful, contented, often indus- 
trious and enterprising in business ventures. Yet on the wiiole, 
their virtues w^ere those of the slave rather than of the 
freeman. "An ignorant population, sprung from a brave and 
active race, but trained to subjection and dependence through 
centuries of feudal and monarchical despotism, was planted in 
the wilderness by the hand of authority and told to grow and 
flourish."^ They could obey unquestioningly the command 
of priest or governor. To think, to decide for themselves, and 
then to follow loyally, if need be heroically, the dictates 
of reason and of conscience was entirely foreign to their habits. 

In these contrasting types of character is to be found the 
first and probably the most potent cause of the remarkable 
contrast in their influence on American history. That a people 
brave, refined, intelligent, loyal to principle, sifted by long and 
fierce persecutions, fleeing to the New World solely that they 
might be free to follow the very highest ideals, should have 

'Fiske's Beginninpfs of New England, 47. 

To understand fully the influence of the Huguenots on Am. history 
one must know something of t lieir own early history and heroic struggles. 
In this view, The Rise of the Huguenots in France, and The Huguenots 
and Henry of Navarre, by Prof. H. M. Baird, are valuable contributious 
to American History. 

"Parkman, The Old Regime in Canada, 394. 



m 

proved one of the most powerful factors in national 
development is not at all surprising. That a peo- 
ple of a low grade of intelligence and wholly un- 
trained in the art of self-government, should have neither the 
desire nor the ability to be an active force in nation-building, is 
also not surprising. So far as these types of character w^ere 
determined by differences of religion, so far has the Protes- 
tantism of the one, the Catholicism of the other contributed to 
tlie result. 

But while difference of character counts for so much in the 
solution of the problem, another factor must also be reckoned 
with, nam.ely: the different circumstances under which these 
two off'-shoots from the French race entered into our national 
life. The Huguenot became an American citizen before the 
••formative period" of our history. The time and the circum- 
stancHs favoi-ed his throwing himself as a vitali:?ing force into 
the political life that was just beginning to be. The French- 
man of the Northwest became an American citizen by the 
issues of war. and the Louisiana Creole b.y purchase. In both 
cases, an already organized government extended its sway over 
him. He was not asked nor expected to take part in it. excejit 
under established conditions, and his remonstrances and peti- 
tions were, as a rule, dismissed or unfavorably reported on. It 
was the intention to arrange matters for all newly acquired ter- 
ritor}^ in accordance with principles previously determined. 
Habituated to altogether different methods of government, un- 
familiar with democratic ideas, untrained in political thinking, 
tlie new citizen had small chance to make himself felt. 

To character, then, must be added opp<jrtunity as ha^'ing 
favored the politi^-al inllnence of the Huguenot. To lack 
of opportunity may be attributed in some degree the want of 
political intiuence on the part of tlie Fr<'nch Catholic. 

Yet another element must be n()t<^d — an element, however. 

that is perhaps the resultant of the two already mentioned 

the complete and ra|)id absoi-ption of the Huguenot in the mass 
of the American peoi)le. • -Sooner than any other, and more 
completely, they became 'American in s])eech. conviction, and 
habits of thought."' This complete ab.sorption. which has 
tended to make them forgotten as Huguenots while thev are 



'Roosevt'il. Wlial AiiKTicaiiism Means. Fcrnm. Api'.. 1S!)4. p. 205. 
Cf. address of llichard ( )hR'v in Bi-CYMitenary Co nnit'inoralioii. 82, fi. 



64 

gratefully remembered as American patriots and statesmen, 
probably contributed very largely to their political influence. 
Because they were so early and so completely Americanized, 
there was no occasion for race jealousies and antipathies; they 
had no French notions to import into governmental methods; 
they did not act unitedly as a faction but individually as 
citizens devoted to the best interests of their adopted country. 
That thus acting, the leading men among them — almost with- 
out exception — worked for the same ends, and especially for 
greater centralization of government points strongly in the di- 
rection of an inherited race tendency. 

The Canadian and the Creole on the other hand, were not 
absorbed nor assimilated. Even after the influx of American 
immigrants intermarriages were for a long time infrequent. 
Indeed their assimilation was more often with the Red Man 
than with other European settlers. Slowly and unwillingly 
they assumed the rights and duties of American citizens, cling- 
ing all the while tenaciously to their own customs and language. 
Had they been a more aggressive people politically than they 
were, they could not thus as aliens have forced the ideas of a 
decadent old-world despotism upon a vigorous and growing 
young nation. 

Many minor causes were doiibtless contributory to the re- 
sult; more extended investigations may yet reveal other impor- 
tant causes; but the facts at present accessible emphasize these 
three, difference in character, in opportunity and in ability to 
be assimilated. And they are amply sufficient to account for 
the observed differences in result. 

To the Canadian and the Creole, we owe gratitude for 
patriotic services; for much of the material development of the 
regions that they were the first white men to enter; for a great 
part of the romance of western history; and for picturesque 
survivals; but for political development, almost nothing. 

To the Huguenot we must be grateful, that while bringing 
no new political inventions, he brought himself, and gave him- 
self with all his heritage of character and ability to the 
new nation, working with energy, persistence, and success to 
make the best political ideas of the age supreme in its Consti- 
tution and potent in its development. 

* * * * * * 

Of late years we are having another influx of French 



65 

immigrants, this time threatening to overwhelm Puritan New 
England with a Catholic population from across the Canadian 
borders. It is yet too soon to determine the effect of this mi- 
gration, but it has caused grave concern to many observers. 
It is but a part of the general j^roblem of foreign immigration 
— than which no other question is of more vital importance. 
The facts herewith presented point by an easy inference 
to a speedy and complete transformation of the immigrant 
from an alien into an American with American habits of 
thought, as one of the essential principles for its solution. 



APPENDIX. 

OENEALOGICAL AND BIOGRAPHICAL NOTES. 

Bayard. — The Pedig-ree of the American family is sup- 
posed to have been traced to Balthazar Bayard, whose ances- 
tors fled from Dauphine about the time of the Massacre of St. 
Bartholomew. There were also families of the name in Cham- 
pag-ne, Languedoc. and Flanders. 

Cf. Am. Ancestry, III.. 79. and Mag. of Am. Hist.. XVII. 
The latter is an answer to the d )ubt raised by Arthur 
Richmond in N. Am. R'^view. Jan. L'^Si. as to the Huguenot 
ancestry of the family. 

Benezet. — Anthony Benezet was born in St. Qneiithi in 
1713. The family tied from persecution to Holland. Thence 
they went to London and afterwards to Philadelphia. Anthony 
joined the Quakers at the age of 14. His life was mostly spent 
in religious and philanthro})ic labors. 

See brief biography prefixed to Views on Slavery. 

Brevard. — Ephraim Brev^ard is generally admitted to 
have been of Huguenot descent, but I cannot trace his ancestry. 
He was born in Maryland in 174-1; went to N. Carolina when 
about 4 years of age; graduated at Princeton in 176'^; was later 
a surgeon in the army; was made prisoner at the surrender of 
Charleston and died from the effects of his imprisonment. He 
was secretary of the Mechlinburg Convention, and the resolu- 
tions differed but slightly from his draft. 

Hunter, Sketches of West,ern Life in North Carolini, 
47 and 48. 

Boudinot. — A family of this name came to Mass. The 
name is found in the records of Oxford. They probably moved 
to one of the middle states. The Ellas Boudinot known to 
Americ:i,n history was born in Philadelphia. Apr. 21. 1740. His 
grand-father, also named Elias. came to America in IHHd 

Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll.. XXII.. 51; Sketch of Elias 
Boudinot by Helen Boudinot Stryker. Penn. Mag. III.. 191. 

BowDOiN.— Pierre Bowdoin. said to have been a physician 
of Rochelle, lied to America at the time of the Revocation and 
settled in Casco. Maine, probably in 16^7. His grand-son, 
James, was the distinguished Governor of Mass. Gov. Bow- 
doin's daughter. Elizabeth, married Sir Wra. Temple, and Iter 
daughter Elizabeth married Thos. L. Winthrop, fj'om whom 
Robt. Winthrop was descended. The direct line ended wuth 
Gov. Bowdoin's son James — the founder of Bowdoin Col. — but 
LofC. 



67 

some of the descendants of his sister Elizabeth assumed the 
name. 

See Mass. Hist. Soc, Coll.. XXV., 49. 50. and 78; 
New EwfiT. Hist, and Gen. Reg., X.. 78. and VHI., 247. 

There were Bowdoins in Virginia, probably descended 
from John Bowdoin, a brother of James, who moved to that 
state about 1700, (Va.'Hist. Coll., Vol. V., p. XI., footnote.) 

Faneuil. — Three brothers. Andrew, Benjamin, and John 
Faneuil, settled in Boston as early as 1699. John returned to 
France. Peter, the donor of Faneuil Hall, was a son of Benja- 
min, but recei zed his large fortune from his uncle Andrew. 

Cf. Mass. Hist. Soe. Col XXII., 53, Mem. Hist, of Boston, 
II,, 554: and the chapter on ''The French Protestants of Bos- 
ton" in the latter volume. 

Gallatin.— Schaff, (Huguenot Proceedings, I.. 95), and 
other writers speak of Albert Gallatin as of Huguenot descent. 
The truth seems to be that the family, though Protestant and 
close allies of Calvin, were hardly refugees for the faith. They 
moved from Savoy to Geneva in 1510. 

See App. to H. Adams" edition of his Writings and Adam^' 
Life of Gallatin. Book I. 

Gallaudet.— Thomas Hopkins Gallaudet. tlie founder of 
the first institution in America for the education of deaf-mutes, 
was descended from Piei-re Elise Gallaudet— one of the earliest 
settlers of Now Rochelle^whose wife, Margaret Crezot, was 
a descendant of the 94th Doge of Venice. For interesting par- 
ticulars concerning him and his work, see Bi-Centenary Com- 
memoration, 74. if. 

Gratiot.— Charles Gratiot was the son of Huguenot 
parents who fled from La Rochelle on the Revocation. They 
took up their residence at Lausanne. Switzerland, where 
Charles was born in 1753. He received a mercantile education 
in London and came while quite young to Canada to engage in 
the fur trade. In 1774 he settled in Cahokia. After the Revo- 
lution he moved to St. Louis, where he married a daughter of 
Pierre Choteau. Henry Gratiot, his son, was the father of 
Mrs. E. B. Washburne. 

See Wis. Hist. Coll.. Vol. X.. articles by Hon. E. B. Wash- 
burne and Mrs. Adele Gratiot; Scharf. Hist, of St. Louis, 
I. 287; Billon, Annals of St. Louis. 214, ff. 

Hamilton. —Alexander Hamilton was born in the West 
Indies and came at an early age to N. Y. There is some 
obscurity about his parentage, but I am not aware that anyone 
has ever seriously questioned his descent on his mother's side 
from a Huguenot family who took refuge in the West Indies. 
A discussion of his ancestry may be found in Lodge's Life of 
Hamilton, App. A. 

Jay. — Augustus Jay, one of the numerous exiles from the 



68 

city of Rochelle, settled in New York in 1697. He married a 
daughter of Balthazar Bayard. Their son, Peter, married 
a daughter of Jacobus Van Courtland, by whom he had ten 
children. John was the eighth, born in N. Y., Dec. .12, 1745. 
It will be noticed that none of his ancestors had intermarried 
with the English, so that he was of French and Dutch blood. 
See Jaj^'s Jay, Chap. I. 

Marion. — The ancestors of Francis Marion came from La 
Chaume. C. W. Baird, (II., 52 and footnote), gives this fact, re- 
ferring to Liste de Francois et Suisses refugiez en Caroline. 
See also Mass. Hist. Coll. XXII., 56. 

Laurens. — The ancestors of Henry Laurens were French 
Protestant Refugees who first settled in N. Y. and moved 
thence to Charleston. 

See Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., XXIL, 55. 

Manigault. — Gabriel Manigault was descended from Pe- 
ter Manigault. who went from Rochelle to England in 1685 and 
came to Carolina about 1696. See Am. Ancestry. V. 35, ft. 
and Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., XXII. 55. 

A Dr. Gabriel Manigault. presumably a direct descendant, 
is one of the Ex. Com. of the S. Car. Huguenot Soc. 

See Transactions, No. 3. 

Morris. — ^The mother of Gouverneur Morris was one of 
the Huguenot Gouverneurs who settted in N. Y. after the re- 
vocation of the Edict of Nantes. 

See Roosevelt's Life of Morris, 2. 

Revere. — The Revere or Rivier family was one of the old- 
est in Europe — may be traced, perhaps to the time of the first 
crusade. They lived in Dauphine and had large estates and 
many titles of nobility. Paul Revere was the son of Apollos, 
a Huguenot who went from France to the island of Guern- 
sey and thence to Boston. 

See Am. Ancestry, V. 41. and Goss's Life of Revere, 
Chap. I. Goss also has an article on Revere in Mag. of Am. 
Hist., Jan. 1886. 

Sevier. — John Sevier came of a Huguenot family named 
Xavier, though his immediate ancestors were from England. 

See Phelan, Hist, of Tenn.. p. 72, and Roosevelt. Winning 
of the West, L, 180-183. 

Tyler. — Anne Contesse, a Huguenot, was the mother of 
Gov. Tyler and the grandmother of Pres. Tyler. 

See Va. Hist., Coll. V., Introd. 

Vincent. — The pedigree of Bishop Vincent may be found 
in Am. Ancestry, VIH, 25. It is traced to a refugee who set- 
tled in New Jersey. 

Whittier. — The poet Whittier"s maternal grandmother 
was Sarah Greenleaf. The Greenleaf family were from 



69 

France, the name being originally Feuillevert. which was 
translated as so many other Huguenot names have been into 
English. 

See Linton's Life of Whittier and Bi-Centenary Com. 70. 

It is a somewhat carious fact that the first white men in 
Minn., so far as can be learned, were two Huguenots engaged 
in the fur trade. Medard Chouart. known as Sieur Grosel- 
liers, and Pierre d'Esprit. known as Sieur Radisson. 

See Rev. E. D. Neill's Hist, of the upper Miss. Valley. 



BIBLIOGRAPHY. 

Adams, John, Life and works. C. F. Adams; Boston, 1856. 

American Ancestry, Hughes. T. P.: Albany, 1887-1893. 

American Biography, Cyclopedia of; edited by J. G. Wilson 
and John Fiske, New York, 1887. 

American Biography, National Cyclopedia of; N. Y. 1892. 

American Genealogy, J. B. Holgate; Albany, 1848. . 

American spirit, The Early and the Genesis of it; R. S. 
Storrs, D. D., N. Y., 1878. 

American Conflict, The, Horace Greeley; Hartford, 1864. 

American Archives; Washington, 1833-1837. 

American State Papers, Washington. 

Annals of Congress, Washington. 

Annals of America, Abiel Holmes; Cambridge, 1829. 

Atlantic Monthly. Vols. LV.-LVII. 

Boston, Memorial History of, edited by Justin Winsor, 
Boston, 1882. 

Bowdoin, James, A Memorial Address by R. C. Winthrop; 
Boston, 1849. 

Buffalo Historical Soc, Publications 1879 and 1882. 

Canada, The Old Regime in. Francis Parkman; Boston, 

1874. 

Chief Justices, Lives and Times of, Henry Flanders; Phil- 
adelphia, 1881. 

Constitution, History of the, Geo. T. Curtis; N. Y., 1854. 

Constitutions, The Federal and State, etc., B. F. Poore; 
Washington, 1878. 

Constitutional History of the United States, H. von Hoist; 
Chicago, 1889. 

Congressional Documents, Washington. 

Critical Period of American History, John Fiske, Boston 

1892. 

Debates in Congress, Abridgement of, T. H. Benton; 

N. Y., 1857. 

Debates on the Federal Constitution, Jonathan Elliot; 
Washington, 1836. 



71 

Diplomatic Correspondence of the American Revolution, 
edited by .Tared Sparks: Boston. 1829-1H86. 

Emigrants to Pennsylvania. Collection of Thirty Thousand 
names of, D. I. Rupp: Harrisburg. l^TH. 

Federalist. H. C. Lodge's edition; N. Y. 1888. 

Financial History of the United States, Bolles. N. Y. 1885. 

Franklin, Benjamin, Life, by James Parton; N. Y. 1864. 

French Protestant Refugfees. M. C. Weiss; N. Y. 1851. 
(Translation.) 

French Settlements and Settlers in Rhode Island. Potter; 
Providence, 1789. (Now published as No. 5 of R. I. 
Historical Tracts.) 

Forum. The, April, 1894. 

Gallatin. Albert, Life by H. Adams, Phil. 

Gallatin, Albert, Writings, edited by H. Adams; Phil. 1879. 

Garfield, James A.. Works edited by B. A. Hinsdale; Boston, 

1882. 

Genealogical Notes of New York and New Engfland families, 
S. V. Talcott; Albany, 1883. 

Hamilton, Alexander. Life by W. G. Sumner; N. Y. 1890. 

Hamilton, Alexander. Life by H. C Lodg:e, Boston; and N. Y., 
1892. 

Hamilton, Alexander, Life by J. T. Morse; Boston, 1876. 

Hamilton, Alexander, Works, edited by J. C Hamilton; N. Y. 
1851. 

Hamilton. Alexander. Works, edited by H. C. Lodge, N. Y., 

1885. 

Hartford Convention, History of, Thoo. Dwight; N. Y., 
1833. 

Historical Mag-azine; Boston, Morrisiana, 1857-1869. 

Huguenots in France and America, H. F. Lee; Cambridge, 

1843. 

Huguenots on the Hackensack, Demarest; New Brunswick, 

N. J., 1886. 

Huguenot Emigration to America, C. W. Baird; N. Y., 1885. 

Huguenot Society of America. Proceeding; N. Y., 1889- 
1891. 

Huguenot Society of America, Collections; N. Y. 1886. 

Huguenot Society of South Carolina. Transactions; Charles- 
ton, 1889-1894. 



72 

Illinois in the Eighteenth Century, Edward G. Mason; 
Chicago, 1887. (Fergus Hist. Tracts, No. 12. It 
contains three papers read before the Chicago Hist. 
Soc. ;and its Parish Records; Old Fort Chartres; 
Kaskaskia and Col. John Todd's Record Book.) 

Illinois. Pioneer History of; Rejmolds; Belleville, 1852. 

Indiana Gazetteer; Indianapolis, 1849. 

Jay, John. Life and Writings by Wm. Jay; N. Y.. 1833. 

Jay. John. Life by Pellew; Boston, 1890. 

Jay, John, Correspondence and Public Papers; edited by 
Henry P. Johnston; N. Y., 1890. 

Jefferson. Thomas, Life by Henry S. Randall; N. Y., 1858. 

Jefferson, Thomas, Writings; Washington, 1853. 

Journal of the Federal Convention, (Madison's, edited by 
E. H. Scott); Chicago, 1893. 

Journals of Congress; Washington, 1823. 

John Hopkins University Studies; Baltimore. 

Laurens. John, Army Correspondence of, 1777-1778; (Bradford 
Club Series No. 7.); N. Y. 1867, 

Local Constitutional History of the U. S., George E. Howard; 
Extra Vol. IV.. J. H. U. Studies); Baltimore, 1889. 

Louisiana, History of, (The American Domination), Charles 
Gayarre, N. Y., 1886. 

Louisiana, Views of, H. M. Brackenridge; Pittsburg, 1814. 

Louisiana, Hist. Coll. of; N. Y,, 1846-1853. 

Louisiana, The Story of, Maurice Thompson; Boston, 1888. 

Louisiana, History of, Barbe Marbois; Phil., 1830. 

Loyalists of the American Revolution, Lorenzo Sabine; 
Boston, 1864. 

Magazine of American History; N. Y., 1877. 

Massachusetts Bay, History of from 1628 to 1774, Thomas 
Hutchinson; Boston, 1767-1774. 

Massachusetts Hist. Soc. Collections; Boston. 

Michigan Pioneer and Historical Collections; Lansing, 1877. 

Michigan, Political History of, James V. Campbell; Detroit, 
1876. 

Michigan, History of, C. R. Tuttle; Detroit, 1874. 
Michigan, The Red Book of, Charles Lanman; Detroit, 1871. 
Michigan Biographies, compiled by S. D. Bingham, 
Lansing, 1888. 



Morris. Gouverneur. Life and Writings. .Tared Sparks: 
Boston, 1832. 

Morris, Gouverneur. Diary and Letters, edited by Anne 
Gary Morris: N. Y. 1888. 

Morris. Gouverneur. Life. by Theodore Roosevelt. 
Boston. 1892. 

My Own Times. Reynolds; 1855. 

Narrative and Critical History of America, edited by 
Justin Winsor: Boston, 1888. 

National Magazine: N. Y.. 1891. 

New England, History of, J. G. Palfrey; Boston, 1858-1878. 

New England Hist, and Gen. Register; Boston. 1847. 

New England, Federalism. Documents relating to. edited 
by Henry Adams; Boston, 1877. 

New York, Political History of, Jabez Hammond; 
Albany, 1842. 

New York, Memorial History of, edited by J. G. Wilson: 
N. Y., 1892. 

New York, Documentary History of; Albany, 1849. 

New York. Documents relating to the Colonial History of; 

Albany, 1856. 
New^ Jersey Archives: Newark 1880. 
Niles' Weekly Register; Baltimore. 1811. 

North Carolina, Sketches of Western. C. L. Hunter; 
Raleigh, 1877. 

North American Review; Vol. CXXII. 

Notes on the Early Settlement of the Northwest. Jacob 
Burnett; N. Y.. 1847. 

Officers of the Continental Army during the War of the 
Revolution; Historical Register of, compiled by F. 
B. Heitman of the War Dept. : Washington, 1893. 

Ohio, Rufus King; Boston. 1888. 

Ohio, Caleb Atwater: Cincinnati, 1838. 

Ohio, The State of. Sources of her Strength, (Western Re- 
serve Hist, and Arch Tracts, No. 55.) Chas. Whit- 
tlesey; Cleveland, 1881. 

Old Northwest, B. A. Hinsdale: N. Y., 1888. 

Oxford, Mass., History of, Daniels; Oxford, Mass., 1892. 

Puritan. The, in England. Holland, and America, Douglas 
Campbell; N. Y. 1892. 



74 

Randolph Co.. 111., HLstory of; Phil. 1883. 

Revere, Col. Paul, Life of. E. H. Goss; Boston. 1891. 

Revocation of the Edict of Nantes. Commemoration of, Bi 
Centenary of; N. Y. 1886. 

Rhode Island Colonial Records; Providence. 1856. 

Slavery in Illinois. Hist. Sketch of the Early Movement 
for Legalizing. Wm. H. Brown: Chicago, 1865. 

Slavery and Anti-Slavery. Wm. Goodell; N. Y. 

Slave Power in America. The Rise and Fall of, Henry Wil- 
son; N. Y.. 1872. 

Slavery. Views on American, taken a century ago; Phil., 
1858. (Prom the writings of Anthony Benezet and 
John Wesley). 

South Carolina Hist., Collections; N. Y., 1836. 

St. Clair Co., 111., History of; Phil., 1881. 

St. Clair Papers, edited by W. H. Smith; Cincinnati. 1882. 

St. Louis, History of from the Earliest Time. J. T. Scharf; 
Phil., i883. 

St. Louis, Annals of in its Early Days. Fred. E. Billon; St. 

Louis, 1886. 
Supreme Court of the United States. The, H. L. Carson; 

Phil. 1891. 
Tennessee, History of, James Phelan; Boston and N. Y.. 

1888. 
Ulster Hist. Soc. Collections; Kingston, 1860. 
United States. HLstory of the. Geo. Bancroft; Boston. 1876. 
United States, History of the, Richard Hildreth; N. Y. 1879. 

United States, History of the. James Schouler; Washing- 
ton. 1889. 

Vincennes, Colonial History of, John Law; Vincennes, 1858. 

Virginia Hist. Soc. Collections; Richmond, 1882. 

Virginia, Old Churches and Families of. Mead; Phil., 1878. 

Virginie, Histoire De La, Robt. Beverly; Amsterdam, 1777. 

View of the Climate and Soil of the United States of 
America, C. P. Volney: London, 1804. 

War of 1812, History of, C. J. Ingersoll; Phil.; 1853, 

Washington, George. The Writings of, edited by W. C. 

Ford; N. Y., 1891. 
Webster, Daniel, Great Speeches of, edited by E. P. Whipple; 

Boston. 



Wisconsi,i Hist. Soc. Collections; Madison, 1SS5. 




\ 



JOURNAL OBSERVER PRfNT, 
REDFICLD. S. D. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



011 464 798 6 # 




\ 



: 



^ . les of this^^^ ^ ^—....^ 




